Framing Paper: Board-Facilitated Process for a GAC - GNSO Council Dialogue on Closed Generics
Board Correspondence regarding the Facilitated Dialogue:
- 6 Mar 2022 Letter from Maarten Botterman to Manal Ismail and Philippe Fouquart
- 10 Mar 2022 Letter from Manal Ismail to Maarten Botterman
- 30 Mar 2022 Letter from Maarten Botterman to Manal Ismail
- 22 Apr 2022 Letter from Manal Ismail to Maarten Botterman
- 27 Apr 2022 Letter from Philippe Fouquart to Maarten Botterman
- 19 May 2022 Letter from Maarten Botterman to Philippe Fouquart
- 19 May 2022 Letter from Maarten Botterman to Manal Ismail
- 29 June 2022 Letter from Philippe Fouquart to Maarten Botterman and Manal Ismail
- 25 July 20222 Letter from Maarten Botterman to to Manal Ismail and Philippe Fouquart
GAC Advice, Statements & Correspondence on the issue:
- ICANN46 GAC Beijing Communiqué (11 April 2013), GAC Advice to the ICANN Board: “For strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access should serve a public interest goal.”
- Response to Sub Pro PDP CC2 (22 May 2017): “Based on principles of promoting competition and consumer protection, exclusive registry access should serve the public interest goal (per Beijing GAC Communiqué Cat. 2 Safeguards Advice)”
- Comment on Sub Pro PDP Initial Report (8 October 2018): Re-affirms previous advice (Beijing Communiqué, Cat. 2 Safeguards): “for strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access should serve a public interest goal”
- ICANN67 Communique (16 March 2020), Issues of Importance to the GAC: “The GAC should conduct further work to identify criteria, examples and use-cases that may serve for assessing the public interest in the context of closed generics.”
- GAC Compilation of Individual Input (9 May 2020): Majority of GAC members contributing support previously articulated GAC Advice (GAC Beijing Advice): “exclusive registry access should serve a public interest goal”. Individual GAC members noted that public interest should be defined.
- ICANN68 GAC Communique (27 June 2020), Issues of Importance to the GAC: “Some GAC members expressed the view that the lack of a formal PDP WG recommendation on the delegation of closed generics would imply that the relevant Board Resolution from the 2012 round would still apply.”
