- Category: (replace this text with one of the following categories: Administration/Budget, ccTLD, gTLD, IP, ICANN Structure, International Agreement)
- Topic: (replace this text with a keywords from title)
- Board meeting date: 3 February 2009
- Resolution number: 2009-02-03-05.02, 2009-02-03-05.03
- URL for Board minutes/resolution: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/minutes-03feb09.htm
- Status: (replace this text with: Completed, Ongoing, Suspended)
Summary
(replace this text with the a one-sentence summary of the resolution)
Text
Denise Michel explained that the Board passed a resolution asking for a consensus recommendation by 13 February 2009 on the treatment of individual users that can be supportive of and not duplicative of ALAC. The ALAC, through a letter form the chair and the At-Large in North America, is seeking extension of time to continue working on consensus recommendations. Denise noted that last week the GNSO council passed a resolution to that effect and is working with ALAC community to resolve issues. Staff asks that the Board support the GNSO council's request for an extension to 20 February 2009 to present its recommendations. While the 13th is the deadline for translations for Mexico, Denise recommended that the Board agree to the extension.
The Chair thanked Denise and asked if there was any discussion.
Steve Goldstein moved to extend time to 20 February 2009 and Roberto Gaetano RG seconded the motion.
The Chair stated that staff should add to the resolution that the Board thanks the GNSO council for its on-going efforts.
All present voted in favor of the resolution to provide the extension to 20 February, with addition suggested by the chair.
Whereas, the Board has received varying recommendations on registrant and user involvement in the GNSO, and the issue of how to incorporate the legitimate interests of individual Internet users in constructive yet non-duplicative ways remains an open issue that affects GNSO restructuring.
Whereas, on 11 December 2008 the Board requested that members of the GNSO community work with members of the ALAC/At-Large community and representatives of potential new "non-commercial" constituencies to jointly develop a recommendation for the composition and organizational structure of a Non- Commercial Stakeholder Group that does not duplicate the ALAC and its supporting structures, yet ensures that the gTLD interests of individual Internet users (along with the broader non-commercial community) are effectively represented within the GNSO. The Board requested that this recommendation should be submitted, no later than 24 January 2009, for consideration by the Board.
Whereas members of the community are working on this request, and the GNSO Council, ALAC and NARALO have requested an extension of the deadline to 20 February 2009 for submitting a recommendation to the Board.
It is hereby resolved (2009-02-03-05.02) that the Board requests that a consensus recommendation (or recommendations, if no consensus is reached) be submitted to the Board by 20 February 2009 for consideration.
It further resolved (2009-02-03-05.03) that the Board would like to thank the GNSO Council, ALAC and NARALO for their continuing efforts to reach a consensus recommendation.
Implementation Actions
- (replace this text with specific Action Item)
- Responsible entity: (replace this text with the responsible entity: ICANN department, ICANN Community Structure, Board, U.S. Department of Commerce)
- Due date: (replace this text with Due Date)
- Completion date: (replace this text with Date action was implemented, if different from due date)
- (replace this text with specific Action Item)
- Responsible entity: (replace this text with the responsible entity: ICANN department, ICANN Community Structure, Board, U.S. Department of Commerce)
- Due date: (replace this text with Due Date)
- Completion date: (replace this text with Date action was implemented, if different from due date)
Other Related Resolutions
- (replace this text with links to related resolutions)
Additional Information
- (replace this text with any additional notes related to this resolution, i.e. funding considerations)
