1. Motion to Approve a Charter for a Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group for the IGO & INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP
Motion deferred by request of Avri Doria from meeting on 5 June 2014
Made by: Jonathan Robinson
Seconded by:Thomas Rickert
WHEREAS:
1. The GNSO Council has resolved (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201406) to undertake a GNSO policy development process (PDP) to explore possible amendments to the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and the Uniform Rapid Suspension procedure (URS) so as to enable International Governmental Organizations (IGOs) and International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs) to access and use curative rights protection mechanisms;
2. The GNSO Council has reviewed the draft Working Group Charter appended as Annex 3 to the Final Issue Report (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/igo-ingo-crp-access-charter-25may14-en.pdf) which was delivered to the GNSO Council on 25 May 2014.
RESOLVED:
1. The GNSO Council approves the Charter and appoints ___________ as the GNSO Council liaison to the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP Working Group (WG);
2. The GNSO Council directs ICANN staff to issue a call for volunteers for the PDP WG no later than seven days after the approval of this motion; and
3. Until such time as the WG selects a chair for the WG and that chair is confirmed by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council liaison to the WG shall serve as the interim chair.
2 New gTLDs Subsequent Rounds
Made by: Bret Fausett
Seconded by: Avri Doria
1. Whereas, in 2005, this Council of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) began a policy development process to consider the introduction of new gTLDs, which resulted in the creation of certain policy recommendations for the launch of a new gTLD application process; and,
2. Whereas, in September 2007, this Council adopted the policy recommendations from the GNSO policy development process and forwarded them to the ICANN Board of Directors; and,
3. Whereas, in June 2008, the ICANN Board adopted the GNSO's policy recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs and directed staff to develop an implementation plan for a new gTLD introduction process; and
4. Whereas, in September 2009, ICANN and the U.S. National Telecommunications Information Administration entered into an Affirmation of Commitments (“AOC”) in which ICANN committed to organize a review of certain aspects of the introduction and expansion of gTLDs (AOC, at Section 9.3); and,
5. Whereas, in its April, 2011 Communique, ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (“GAC”) asked (at p.6) for a "comprehensive post-launch independent review of the [Trademark] Clearinghouse [to] be conducted one year after the launch of the 75th new gTLD in the round;” and,
6. Whereas, in June 2011, the ICANN Board approved an Application Guidebook ("AGB") for new gTLDs and authorized the launch of the New gTLD Program; and,
7. Whereas, the AGB provided that it was intended to govern "the first round of what is to be an ongoing process for the introduction of new TLDs" (Application, Module 2); and,
8. Whereas, Section 1.1.6 of the AGB ("Subsequent Application Rounds") provided that "ICANN’s goal [was] to launch subsequent gTLD application rounds as quickly as possible" and promised to base the timing of subsequent rounds on "experiences gained and changes required after this round is completed" with a "goal...for the next application round to begin within one year of the close of the application submission period for the initial round.;" and
9. Whereas, the first round application submission period closed in June, 2012; and,
10. Whereas, the Council believes that it has a continuing interest and role to play in evaluating the experiences of the first round and proposing policy recommendations, if necessary, for changes to subsequent rounds;
Now therefore, it is resolved:
1. The GNSO Council creates a new open committee to discuss the experiences gained by the first round of new gTLD applications and identify subjects for future issue reports, if any, that might lead to changes or adjustments for subsequent application procedures; and,
2. ICANN invites the New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board to provide input into the GNSO Council discussion to identify areas that it believes may be appropriate for discussion for an evaluation of the current gTLD application round and/or for possible adjustments for subsequent application procedures; and,
3. The GNSO Council requests a status report from ICANN Staff on the current progress of (a) the New gTLD program generally; (b) ICANN's anticipated timeline and work plan for the review specified in Section 9.3 of the Affirmation of Commitments; (c) ICANN's work to date on any evaluation of the first round; (d) the work to date on the post-launch independent review of the Trademark Clearinghouse; and (e) ICANN's current projection for a timetable for subsequent rounds.
