[PC-NCSG] Proposed motion for GNSO Council meeting

[David Cake]

I would suggest specifically mentioning that ICANN itself ( and ALAC, and the GNSO) all agree that it is policy, not implantation, and no justification at all is offered for staff treating it as an implementation issue with no need for the involvement of the GNSO or any other policy process. 

On 02/04/2013, at 9:33 PM, Maria Farrell <maria.farrell at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's the deadline for motions to be discussed at the Beijing GNSO Council meeting. The agenda for the meeting is pretty light and doesn't touch on some of the key current issues: RAA and TMCH. Robin suggested we try and prompt discussion on the TMCH, so here's a draft motion I could propose - VERY happy to take re-drafts of it, but I need to submit it today, April 2nd.
> 
> Cheers, Maria
> 
> 
> "The GNSO Council registers its disappointment and concern at the recent adoption in significant parts by ICANN staff of the TMCH "Strawman Solution" proposed by a narrow subset of GNSO stakeholders and developed in an un-transparent manner by a numerically imbalanced subset of ICANN stakeholders. The significant expansion by staff of rights protection mechanisms in the new gTLDs, following a lengthy and balanced policy process of the GNSO that settled and closed these issues represents an unwarranted intrusion into the policy-making function by ICANN staff. The GNSO Council notes the recent public comments by the CEO to the Non-Contracted Parties House of the GNSO in January 2013 that the process of developing these further rights protection mechanisms was procedurally flawed and did not meet ICANN's standards of transparency and accountability. The GNSO Council strongly regrets the decision by ICANN staff and a small number of stakeholders to circumvent the established, transparent and rules-based policy development process, to the detriment of the GNSO Council's bylaw-defined role and the multi-stakeholder model more generally." 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg