/
Motions 8 January 2009

Motions 8 January 2009

Owned by Former user (Deleted)
Last updated: Mar 31, 2011Version comment

18 Dec 2008 Motions

Motions on RAA

First Motion

Made by: Tim Ruiz
Seconded: Chuck Gomes

Whereas:

  • ICANN has undertaken a lengthy consultative process related to amending the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA);
  • The parties have arrived at a set of amendments that are generally thought to be worthy of inclusion in the RAA;

Resolve:
The GNSO Council supports the attached RAA amendments (documented in http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/current-list-proposed-raa-amendments-16dec08.pdf) and recommends to the Board that they be adopted.

Second motion:

Made by: Tim Ruiz
Seconded: Chuck Gomes

Whereas:

  • The GNSO Council has recommended that the RAA amendments developed by the ICANN community be adopted;
  • There is a belief that additional amendments to the RAA may be required;
  • The Registrar Constituency is open to continuing the dialogue about future changes to the RAA;

Resolve:

The GNSO Council calls on ICANN to establish a consultative process by
which to review the superset of community-suggested RAA issues and
amendments not addressed in the present set of amendments and to work
with Registrars to develop a procedure for proposing additional
amendments in the future.

Motions on gTLD Implementation

Motion 1 (tabled until 8 January meeting)

Made by Chuck Gomes

Seconded by: Tony Harris

Whereas:

Implementation Guideline E states, “The application submission date will be at least four months after the issue of the Request for Proposal and ICANN will promote the opening of the application round.” (See Final Report, Part A, Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains, dated 8 August 2007 at http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm#_Toc43798015 )
The intent of the GNSO with regard to Guideline E was to attempt to ensure that all potential applicants, including those that have not been active in recent ICANN activities regarding the introduction of new gTLDs, would be informed of the process and have reasonable time to prepare a proposal if they so desire.

The minimum 4-month period for promoting the opening of the application round is commonly referred to as the ‘Communications Period’.

It appears evident that a second Draft Applicant Guidebook (RFP) will be posted at some time after the end of the two 45-day public comment periods related to the initial version of the Guidebook (in English and other languages).
Resolve:

The GNSO Council changes Implementation Guideline E to the following:

  • Best efforts will be made to ensure that the second Draft Applicant Guidebook is posted for public comment at least 14 days before the first international meeting of 2009, to be held in Mexico from March 1 to March 6.
  • ICANN will initiate the Communications Period at the same time that the second Draft Applicant Guidebook is posted for public comment.
  • The opening of the initial application round will occur no earlier than four (4) months after the start of the Communications Period and no earlier than 30 days after the posting of the final Applicant Guidebook (RFP).
  • As applicable, promotions for the opening of the initial application round will include:
  • Announcement about the public comment period following the posting of the second Draft Applicant Guidebook (RFP) * Information about the steps that will follow the comment period including approval and posting of the final Applicant

Guidebook (RFP) * Estimates of when the initial application round will begin.

Motion 2 (tabled until 8 January meeting)

Made by: Chuck Gomes
Seconded: Adrian Kinderis

Whereas both the GNSO and ccNSO are anticipating implementation of processes to introduce IDN TLDs in 2009,

Resolve1) the GNSO Council strongly believes that neither the New gTLD or
ccTLD fast track process should result in IDN TLDs in the root before
the other unless both the GNSO and ccNSO so agree, and
2) fast track IDN ccTLDs should not be entered into the root if they do
not have an enforceable commitment to do the following:i) follow security and stability requirements such as those contained in gTLD Registry contracts, IDN Guidelines and IDN standards;
ii) pay ICANN fees sufficient to ensure that IDN ccTLDs are fully self-funding and are not cross-subsidized by other ICANN activities.

Motion to Approve the OSC Charter

(sent back to OSC with comments - tabled until 29 Jan 2009)

Moved by: Chuck Gomes on 30 December 2008

Seconded by: Olga Cavalli on 31 December 2008

Whereas:

  • The GNSO Council reviewed and accepted the new GNSO Improvements Implementation Plan PDF, 96K developed by the Planning Team at its 16 October meeting.
  • That Plan called for the creation of anOperations Steering Committee (OSC)to oversee efforts to enhance the GNSO’s structure, constituencies, and communications.
  • The OSC was formed and held five teleconference meetings and conducted various online discussions as of 30 December 2008.
  • The OSC reviewed and modified the draft OSC Charter prepared by the GNSO Improvements Planning Team and recommends that the Council approve the revised draft Charter dated 22 Dec 08 and contained at the committee’s wiki site at https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?operations_steering_committee_osc.

Resolve:

  • The GNSO Council approves the OSC Charter and directs the OSC to proceed in fulfilling the terms of that Charter.