GNSO Council Approval of Data Collection Request from RPM Review PDP Working Group
Submitted by Heather Forrest
Seconded by
WHEREAS:
- In October 2015, the GNSO Council adopted all the consensus recommendations from the Data & Metrics for Policy Making (DMPM) Working Group and instructed ICANN staff to commence implementation of the recommendations (https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20151021-1);
- The Metrics Request Decision Tree and Working Group Metrics Request Form developed by the DMPM Working Group were consequently incorporated into the GNSO’s Working Group Guidelines (https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-01sep16-en.pdf);
- The Working Group chartered by the GNSO Council to conduct the Policy Development Process (PDP) to review all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in All gTLDs has, after extensive deliberations, developed a list of data collection tasks that it believes are critical in order for it to fulfill its Charter (https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/rpm-charter-15mar16-en.pdf);
- As part of its chartered tasks, the PDP Working Group was urged to bear in mind that a fundamental underlying objective of its work is to “create a framework for consistent and uniform reviews of these [RPMs] in the future”;
- The Competition, Consumer Protection and Consumer Trust (CCT) Review Team convened under the ICANN Bylaws has noted the lack of, and need for, data in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the various RPMs that were created for ICANN’s 2012 New gTLD Program round (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cct-rt-draft-report-07mar17-en.pdf), and
- The PDP Working Group has developed and submitted a DMPM data request form, as required by the GNSO’s Working Group Guidelines, to the GNSO Council for its approval on [DATE] (https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/rpm-sunrise-trademark-claims-07sep17-en.pdf)
RESOLVED:
- The GNSO Council approves the DMPM request as submitted by the Review of All RPMs in All gTLDs PDP Working Group.
- The GNSO Council directs ICANN policy staff to forward the DMPM request to the appropriate department of ICANN Organization for the requisite budget and resource approvals, with a further request that the matter be considered and approved in as timely a fashion as practicable.
- The GNSO Council requests a follow up report from the Review of All RPMs in All gTLDs PDP Working Group on the progress and outcomes of its DMPM request in time for the GNSO Council’s meeting scheduled for [21 December 2017], and a regular written report thereafter, at intervals of not less frequently than monthly, followed by a detailed status report on the Working Group’s view of the utility of the data collection exercise on the progress and timeline of Phase One of the PDP by ICANN61.
Nomination of GNSO Candidates for the Third Review of ICANN Accountability and Transparency (ATRT3)
Submitted by: Susan Kawaguchi
Seconded:
Whereas,
1. On 31 January 2017, ICANN launched a call for volunteers seeking individuals interested in serving as a volunteer Review Team member on the ATRT3 (see https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2017-01-31-en).
2. Under the new Bylaws, each SO/AC participating in the Specific Review may nominate up to 7 members to the Review Team, for consideration by the SO/AC leadership, for a review team of no more than 21 members, plus an ICANN Board member (designated by the ICANN Board). Any SO/AC nominating up to 3 individuals are entitled to have those nominees selected as members to the review team, so long as the nominees meet the applicable criteria for service on the team.
3. The GNSO Council tasked the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) to carry out the review and selection of GNSO endorsed candidates for the ATRT3 for Council consideration.
4. The SSC reviewed the candidates that requested GNSO endorsement (see https://community.icann.org/display/GSSC/ATRT3) taking into account the criteria outlined in the call for volunteers as well as the desire to ensure a RT that is balanced for diversity and expertise. The SSC submitted its full consensus recommendations to the GNSO Council on [date] which confirmed the ranking of the 1-7 candidates as well as the expectation that, at a minimum, the 1-3 candidates would be considered primary candidates with a guaranteed seat for the ATRT3.
5. The GNSO Council considered the recommendations of the SSC.
Resolved,
1. The GNSO Council nominates, ranked in order: [INSERT NAMES] as its primary three candidates for the ATRT3. Furthermore, the GNSO nominates, in ranked order: [INSERT NAMES] to be considered for inclusion in the ATRT3 by the SO-AC Chairs should additional places be available that need to be filled.
2. The GNSO Council acknowledges concerns raised by the SSC about the general lack of diversity (gender, geographic) in the pool of candidates for Review Teams, and will encourage SG/Cs to widely publicize calls for volunteers and make efforts to promote sufficient diversity in the pool of applicants for future application processes.
3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the staff supporting the ATRT3.
4. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the applicants that have received endorsement that the GNSO Council expects that, if selected for the ATRT3, the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in their work on the ATRT3, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the ATRT3, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team members.
5. The GNSO Council requests staff supporting the ATRT3 and application process to send a response to those applicants who did not receive endorsement for this Review Team, thanking them for their interest. The response should also encourage them to follow the ATRT3 work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions and to apply for future opportunities within the GNSO Community as they arise.
