[PC-NCSG] fw: [council] Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures

Sat Dec 5 14:18:54 EET 2015

That's really helpful Marillia. Thank you so much - it places things into a bit of perspective.

 I had a post earlier that, for some reason, was cut short. I wanted to suggest that perhaps we can set up teams to deal with issues with some overlap. For example, we have a few potential pdp / pc opportunities forthcoming that involve rpm's, some dealing with WHOIS and related privacy issues, along with the transition CCWG/CWG policy areas. We need to find a way to link our expertise in these areas, often possessed by our veterans of many years, with new members who have interest in these areas but no experience,  with our Councillors, who have to know a little bit about all of these areas.

 As we prepare to organise the PC for the coming year I'd suggest considering appointing not only a PC Chair but perhaps sub-Chairs in charge of coordinating he PC in specific policy areas. With all that is coming down the pipeline it will be hard to impossible for any one individual to keep abreast of and coordinate our work in all policy areas. Perhaps some delegation would be helpful...\

 Ed

----------------------------------------
 From: "Marilia Maciel" <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 5, 2015 11:14 AM
To: "Edward Morris" <egmorris1 at toast.net>
Cc: "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, "pc-ncsg" <pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org>
Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] fw: [council] Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures   
 Hello everyone,   
 Thanks Ed for sending the final report. Maybe it would be interesting to us all on the list if we can map the parallel tracks of discussion that relate to the new gTLD program assessment, so we can decide the best way to intervene:

 a) Competition, consumer trust and consumer choice review (CCT). This review about the new gTLD program is part of the Affirmation of Commitment mandatory periodic reviews.
 Status: self-nominations for the review team have been made. SO/ACs are deliberating on endorsements. The decision on the composition of the team will be made by CEO and GAC chair.  See: https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct 

  b) Potential GNSO policy development process on new gTLD subsequent procedures. The final issue report (shared by Ed) was sent to the GNSO and this will probably trigger a policy development process.  

 c) Implementation review and other assessments/metrics being produced by ICANN. These process has been going on for some time and several documents have been produced. Although they do not have a policy nature, they will probably feed parallel discussions (CCT and the GNSO PDP). For example, see a draft report produced by ICANN staff on implementation review, which is under public comment until December 7th. https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-draft-review-2015-09-23-en

 Although the goals and mandate of the three processes are different, they will have points of overlap, so I think it is useful to look at the whole landscape, although, as Policy Committee, our focus would lie more naturally on the second one. 

 Lastly, the Cross Community Working Party on ICANN's corporate and social responsibility to respect human rights (CCWP-HR) has created subgroups to perform different tasks. Subgroup 4 will be dedicated to "Providing input to PDP new gTLDs from a human rights perspective". We had our first call yesterday. If you would like to join this group, please do so at: https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights4
 In any case, I am facilitating the work there and will keep the information flowing both ways.

 Best wishes!
 Mar?lia

   On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net> wrote:    Hi Rafik,

 I agree with everything you've written.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 5, 2015, at 10:21 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi ,  

I do recall sending the annoucement, creating a google doc for a comment and included the PC. Yes, we did not submit a statement but I would expect the PC to be more proactive in term of developing positions, managing consultation process, set priorities and share the workload. It is the responsability of everyone here.   

I would prefer to be more practical here and suggest that we list all open comments and decide which has high priority, get volunteers for drafting each  and someone to lead it. That should be a regular task.  Definitely, the ccwg report is on the top of the pile.  

Best,  

Rafik   On Dec 5, 2015 9:56 AM, "Edward Morris" <egmorris1 at toast.net> wrote:   Hi everybody,

 I'm forwarding this post from the Council list. We did not file a public comment here, some affiliated with our members did, but we certainly need to be active on any PDP that comes out of this as well as developing some common positions that we should be pushing.

 Ed 

----------------------------------------
 From: "Steve Chan" <steve.chan at icann.org>
Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 11:20 PM
To: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures    
    Dear Councilors,

 Please find attached for your consideration the Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures, which is also available here: http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-final-issue-04dec15-en.pdf. You may recall that the Council requested an Issue Report on the topic at the Buenos Aires meeting in June 2015. Under the ICANN Bylaws, an Issue Report is a mandatory preceding step to a possible PDP that is initiated by the GNSO Council. The Preliminary Issue Report was published for public comment on 31 August 2015, with the forum closing on 30 October 2015. The Report of Public Comments received is expected to be published on 4 December 2015 and made available here: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en. 

 In preparing this Final Issue Report, all the public comments received were analyzed and, where relevant, incorporated into the Final Issue Report. The Report of Public Comments has also been added as a separate Annex. 

 The staff recommendation is that the Council initiate a PDP to  consider and analyze issues discussed in the Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures to determine whether changes or adjustments to the existing policy recommendations in the Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains are needed.  The outcome of the PDP may lead to (i) amending or overriding existing policy principles, recommendations, and implementation guidelines; (ii) developing new policy recommendations, and/or (iii) supplementing or developing new implementation guidance.

 The relevant motions are currently in preparation for proposal by a GNSO Councilor.

 If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know.

   Best,

Steven Chan
Sr. Policy Manager

ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300  

Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
steve.chan at icann.org

direct: +1.310.301.3886
mobile: +1.310.339.4410  

tel: +1.310.301.5800  

fax: +1.310.823.8649 

_______________________________________________
PC-NCSG mailing list
PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

_______________________________________________
PC-NCSG mailing list
PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

--    Mar?lia Maciel 
 Pesquisadora Gestora -  Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade -  FGV Direito Rio 
 Researcher and Coordinator -  Center for Technology & Society -  FGV Law School 
 http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts 

 DiploFoundation associate -  www.diplomacy.edu
 PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee -  http://www.politics.org.br/
 Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20151205/da6bd0c3/attachment-0001.html>