[PC-NCSG] Open Projects

[Matthew Shears]

Hi Amr

Interested in IV - PI.

Thanks.

Matthew
On 1/20/2015 1:15 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I?m trying to get the ongoing PC projects listed, and who might be 
> interested in following up on each of them. Here?s what I have so far, 
> but I?d appreciate a heads-up on anything I am missing:
>
> I. Open GNSO Public Comment Periods (PCP):
>
> 1. Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG 
> initial report 
> (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/transliteration-contact-initial-2014-12-16-en) 
> - PCP closes *February 1st*.
> 2. Policy and Implementation WG initial report 
> (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/policy-implementation-2015-01-19-en) 
> - PCP closes *March 3rd*.
>
> I?m on both these WGs, and serving as GNSO council liaison to both of 
> them. I?m willing to coordinate/draft responses to both of them.
>
> II. Other Open Public Comment Periods of possible interest:
>
> 1. WHOIS Accuracy Pilot Study Report 
> (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-ars-pilot-2014-12-23-en) 
> - PCP closes *Feb 27th*. This is probably something we might find 
> interesting, and may want to write something up on. Anyone on the PC 
> willing to take a lead on it?
>
> III. Board Risk Committee Request for Feedback on Top 5 ICANN 
> Enterprise Risks - Rafik sent an earlier message about this to the PC 
> list, as did Bill to the NCUC list. The deadline to submit feedback is 
> *Feb 5th*, so a bit pressing.
>
> IV. There are ongoing discussions regarding the ?public interest? 
> context within ICANN:
>
> 1. On one hand, there is the review of the PICs and its review 
> process. There seems to be a suggestion to create a working party (I 
> guess similar to that dealing with the GNSO review) to do the work on 
> this, while freezing the new gTLD strings until this issue is 
> resolved. I think it would be great if we could finalise our position 
> on how we believe this should move forward *before the Singapore meeting*.
>
> 2. On the other hand, there is the definition of ?public interest? in 
> the ICANN context, it?s relevance to the ICANN by-laws and the ongoing 
> work of the accountability-CCWG, and how human rights fits into it. 
> The discussion with Fadi in DC seemed promising to me on this, and 
> certainly warrants some kind of follow up. I suggest that we also try 
> to get on top of this *prior to the Singapore meeting*, and perhaps 
> bring it up during the NCSG meeting with the ICANN board. If we have 
> some solid suggestions by then, then perhaps we can propose to the 
> board how to move forward with this. Anyone care to volunteer for this 
> one?
>
> V. NPOC?s statement to the EU on proposed regulation with regard to 
> domain names and trademarks:
>
> I?m obviously coming back to this quite late, but would appreciate an 
> update from Sam on the aftermath of this. I?m guessing the statement 
> was submitted, but am not sure what was being asked of the NCSG-PC on 
> this topic. It was certainly a great statement on NPOC?s part, but it 
> being an NPOC statement, it didn?t require NCSG endorsement of any 
> kind, and I didn?t get the impression that was being asked for anyway. 
> @Sam: Is there anything NPOC would like us to do about this right now?
>
> I?ll be following up with each of these individually, but would 
> appreciate anything I missed being flagged.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20150126/75815b2f/attachment-0001.html>