Hi Wendy

On Aug 3, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Wendy Seltzer wrote:

> I will not be able to make this call either.
> 
> On the table for discussion and vote are two motions on WHOIS studies:
> one to defer all studies until all of them are prepared (the last
> currently have their RFPs under development); the second to begin the
> WHOIS misuse study.
> 
> I initially opposed the misuse study as unscientific in its design, but
> I believe that we are close to amendments that will make this study more
> likely to generate useful results about whether and how data supplied
> for WHOIS is misused.
> 
> I would be interested to hear the group's thoughts whether we should
> support study 1 with amendments or support deferral of all studies.

Why not defer all as you'd proposed and assess globally and comparatively when able?  From an NC standpoint what would be the argument for rushing this one to the front of the line?

Best,

Bill
> 
> 
> 
> On 08/03/2010 01:03 AM, Mary Wong wrote:
>> I apologize that I won't be able to participate on this call, though I
>> will be on the Council call the following day and so will greatly
>> appreciate any updates and comments from NCSG members that might assist
>> the Councillors in relation to the various action items and motions for
>> voting that will be discussed.
>> 
>> I'd also encourage interested members to listen in on the live
>> audiocast of the Council meeting. As Bill and others have said
>> previously, this was the result of a motion made by NCSG Councillors in
>> Brussels, to increase transparency and facilitate better SG
>> participation and decision-making. While some Council meetings can be,
>> shall we say, fairly dry or overly procedurally-focused, there are
>> numerous substantive issues that do come up - e.g. VI, the various
>> Review Teams, WHOIS etc. -and it will be good to be able to not only
>> demonstrate NCSG interest but, perhaps more significantly, help make
>> bottom-up consensus a stronger reality.
>> 
>> Finally, since I won't be on the NCSG call tomorrow, I thought I'd
>> report here that the RAP Implementation team has been established (I'm
>> the sole NCSG rep on it, surrounded by numerous commercial and IP
>> folks). Although we were due to make our first report to the Council
>> this Thursday, nothing much has happened (not surprising, since the
>> group was formed only about a week ago). I expect there'll be more
>> action after the Council meeting, during which the RAP-WG's Final Report
>> will be further discussed.
>> 
>> Thanks and cheers
>> Mary
>> 
>> Mary W S Wong
>> Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
>> Franklin Pierce Law Center
>> Two White Street
>> Concord, NH 03301
>> USA
>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>> Phone: 1-603-513-5143
>> Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
>> Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network
>> (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>> 
>> 
>>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
>> To:NCSG Members List <[log in to unmask]>
>> CC:NCSG-Policy <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: 8/1/2010 10:57 PM
>> Subject: [ncsg-policy] NCSG Open Policy Meeting - 4 August 1300 UTC
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I will send out an updated agenda before the meeting.
>> 
>> So far I see:
>> 
>> - Issues from the Council Agenda below
>> - Report on any WG Status - let me know if the group you are in is
>> worth talking about
>> - Update on the Charter and the Board
>> - Candidates for Review teams.  We spoke to the candidates for Whois at
>> the last meeting.  If the candidates for the Stability and Security are
>> on the call we speak with them.
>> - Other policy issues?
>> - other?
>> 
>> Remember the Council meeting can not be listened to in audiocast -
>> Thursday 5 August at 1500 UTC
>> 
>> GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org/gnso/
>> 
>> a.
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Glen de Saint Géry <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: 30 July 2010 19:30:32 EDT
>> To: liaison6c <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: [liaison6c] Updated Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 5 August
>> 2010.
>> 
>> Please note the link to the :
>> GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org/gnso/
>> Please distribute this link and the agenda to all your stakeholder
>> group/constituency members
>> http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-05aug10-en.htm
>> 
>> Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 5 August 2010.
>> 
>> This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating
>> Procedures approved 28 October 2009 for the GNSO Council.
>> http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/operating-procedures-revised-draft-clean-09oct09-en.pdf
>> For convenience:
>> * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is
>> provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
>> * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the
>> absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this
>> agenda.
>> Meeting Time 15:00 UTC
>> 
>> See the following and http://www.timeanddate.com/ for other times:
>> 08:00 PDT; 10:00 CDT & Quito; 11:00 EDT; 12:00 Buenos Aires; 12:00
>> Brazil; 17:00 CEST; 19:00 Moscow; 20:00 Pakistan; 23:00 Hong Kong; 00:00
>> Tokyo, 01:00 Melbourne (next day)
>> Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members.
>> Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out
>> call is needed.
>> Please click on the link to join the GNSO Council Adobe Connect room
>> http://icann.na3.acrobat.com/gnsocouncil/
>> Please enter as a 'guest'.
>> 
>> 
>> GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org/gnso/
>> Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)
>> 1.1 Roll call of Council members
>> 1.2 Update any statements of interest
>> 1.3 Review/amend agenda
>> 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per
>> the GNSO Operating Procedures:
>> • 15 July Meeting – Scheduled for approval on 28 July 2010 
>> 
>> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg09389.html 
>> 
>> Item 2: OSC GNSO Improvement Recommendations (15 minutes)
>> 
>> 2.1 Refer to motion:
>> 
>> https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?5_august_motions
>> 
>> 2.2 Read the motion (Olga Cavalli)
>> 2.3 Discussion
>> 2.4 Vote
>> (Note that absentee voting will not be allowed for this vote.)
>> 2.5 Action Items (if motion passes):
>> 
>> • Cheat sheet for new voting procedures (Ken Bour)
>> • Distribution of Constituency & Stakeholder Group Operating Procedures
>> (Glen de Saint Géry)
>> • Staff will distribute a package of materials for SGs and
>> Constituencies regarding charters (Rob Hoggarth)
>> 
>> Item 3: Whois Studies (20 minutes)
>> 3.1 Refer to:
>> • Whois Studies Report: 
>> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.pdf
>> 
>> • RFP for Proxy/Abuse Study: 
>> http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-18may10-en.htm
>> • Liz Gasster's summary chart of the studies:
>> http://gnso.icann.org/whois/whois-studies-chart-30jul10-en.pdf 
>> • Brief overview of the study choices presented by Lisa Phifer on 15
>> July: 
>> http://brussels38.icann.org/meetings/brussels2010/presentation-whois-report-23jun10-en.pdf
>> 3.2 Motion to delay decision on Whois studies
>> • Refer to motion: 
>> https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?5_august_motions 
>> • Discussion
>> • Vote
>> (Note that absentee voting will not be allowed for this.)
>> 3.3 Motion to proceed with Study # 1 (if needed)
>> • Refer to motion: 
>> https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?5_august_motions 
>> • Discussion
>> • Vote
>> (Note that absentee voting will not be allowed for this.)
>> 3.4 Continuing discussion of how to proceed in selecting studies
>> 3.5 Next steps?
>> Item 4: September meeting date September 16 (scheduled date) vs.
>> September 8? (10 Minutes)
>> • Refer to Doodle Poll results:
>> o 8 September 11:00UTC and 15:00UTC
>> http://www.doodle.com/k8ci6c69e8zb9ywq
>> o 16 September 11:00UTC
>> http://www.doodle.com/zvvzwfkd9xdp4wge
>> • Discussion
>> • Adobe Connect Poll (Kristina Nordstrom)
>> 
>> Item 5: Prioritization of GNSO work (20 Minutes)
>> 5.1 Refer to posted project ratings: 
>> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-work-prioritization-project-list-value-ratings-23jun10-en.pdf
>> 
>> 5.2 Key points made in the 15 July Council meeting (from meeting
>> minutes):
>> • “. . . not a useful exercise, not much was learnt, should not proceed
>> further with the prioritization exercise.”
>> • “. . . spending more time on the exercise will not accomplish useful
>> results.”
>> • “It was a difficult exercise, policy matters were not prioritized and
>> the core issue, management of the workload, still has not been
>> resolved.”
>> • “The exercise was intended as a first step and not intended to solve
>> the workload management; other steps are needed. The exercise
>> contributed an important degree of common awareness and dissent to the
>> group.”
>> • “The prioritization process could be improved with further input from
>> the Councilors and stakeholder groups.”
>> • “The exercise is important and informative from a staff perspective
>> and the Council needs to look at a two-step process going forward: step
>> one - form a small team to improve the process used to date drawing on
>> input received; step two - develop a process to manage the workload with
>> input from staff of the resources being used to support each of the
>> working groups, which will reflect both staff and community efforts.”
>> • “Support was expressed for continuing the prioritization work, but
>> linking it to the overall ICANN Staff and Community workload and to the
>> Budget process.”
>> • “The question of available resources should be looked at in context.
>> The Vertical Integration working group as an example of one that would
>> not normally have commenced with all the work before Council, yet it did
>> and the community resources were available.”
>> • “Some believe that work should be prioritized but the methodology
>> chosen is not the most appropriate or efficient.”
>> 5.3 Next Steps
>> • Staff Utilization Analysis targeted for 26 August meeting (Liz
>> Gasster)
>> • Adobe Connect Poll Council regarding possible next steps (Kristina
>> Nordstrom):
>> o Option 1: Spend no more time on prioritization 
>> o Option 2: Develop a plan for using the results to manage the workload
>> in the near term
>> o Option 3: Form a drafting team with the task of developing a new
>> process
>> o Option 4: Form a drafting team with the task of improving the
>> process
>> o Option 5: Other? (including combinations of options 2, 3, and or 4)
>> • Discussion?
>> • Action Items
>> Item 6: GNSO Endorsements for the AoC SSR & Whois Policies RTs (10
>> minutes)
>> 6.1 Refer to:
>> • GNSO AoC Reviews site: http://gnso.icann.org/aoc-reviews/ 
>> • GNSO SSR RT site: http://gnso.icann.org/aoc-reviews/dns-ssr-en.htm
>> • GNSO Whois RT site:
>> http://gnso.icann.org/aoc-reviews/whois-policies-en.htm
>> 6.2 Key dates in the endorsement process:
>> • 29 July – End of application period
>> • 19 August – Due date for SG input (SG primary endorsements +
>> additional candidates supported for diversity purposes)
>> • 26 August – Council meeting
>> • 8 or 16 September – Council meeting (see agenda item 11.2 below)
>> • 12 September – GNSO endorsement slate due to Selectors
>> 6.3 Brief summary of candidates by SG for the SSR & Whois RTs (Glen de
>> Saint Géry)
>> 6.4 Discussion
>> 
>> Item 7: Vertical Integration (VI) PDP WG (10 Minutes)
>> 7.1 Progress report (Stéphane Van Gelder)
>> 7.2 Timeline
>> • End of public comment period for Initial Report: 13 August
>> • Target date for summary & analysis of public comments: 16 August
>> • Target date for submission of revised Initial Report to Council: 18
>> August
>> • Deadline for submission of Initial Report to the Board for their
>> retreat: 13 September
>> 7.3 Discussion
>> 
>> Item 8: Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report (5
>> Minutes)
>> 
>> 8.1 Refer to:
>> • Final Report:
>> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf
>> • Summary of Recommendations
>> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-final-report-conclusion-recommendations-13jul10-en.pdf
>> 8.2 Volunteers to develop action plan for Council consideration:
>> • Greg Aaron, chair of the RAP WG
>> • Chuck Gomes, Council Chair
>> • Mikey O'Connor CBUC-RAP WG member 
>> • Joi White  - IPC CSG 
>> • David Donahue -IPC CSG 
>> • Berry Cob - CBUC -RAP WG member 
>> • Phil Corwin - CBUC -RAP WG member 
>> • Mary Wong - NCSG 
>> • Faisal Shah -RAP WG member 
>> • Fred Felman -RAP WG member 
>> • Other?
>> 8.3 Note:
>> • Marika Konings will provide Staff policy support for this effort.
>> • An email list is up and running with all of the above subscribed.
>> • The group will be polled regarding the regular time of the meetings
>> and date of the first meeting; it may be appropriate to use the
>> recurring time that the RAP group used.
>> Item 9: Cartagena Planning (10 Minutes)
>> 9.1 Action items from Brussels Wrap-Up Meeting
>> • Stéphane van Gelder to take the lead, with Glen's assistance, in
>> preparing the schedule for the GNSO calendar for the Cartagena meetings
>> in December 2010.
>> • Glen will follow-up with the ICANN meetings team regarding the
>> following:
>> o Coffee should be available in close proximity to the meeting rooms.
>> o Allowance should be made in the schedule for breaks between all the
>> meetings.
>> o Make Adobe Connect work better with all operating systems or
>> alternatives that allow participation from Linux based systems.
>> o Changing the start time of the Council meeting so that it is no so
>> early.
>> • Wendy Seltzer will lead a group of the following volunteers to
>> develop suggested improvements to the running of the GNSO Public Council
>> meetings:
>> o Tim Ruiz
>> o Kristina Rosette
>> o Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
>> o Edmon Chung
>> o Adrian Kinderis
>> o Others?
>> • A group will be formed to work on the GNSO Council interaction with
>> the Board.
>> o Volunteers:
>> o Terry Davis 
>> o David Taylor 
>> o Jaime Wagner 
>> o Zahid Jamil 
>> o Stéphane van Gelder 
>> o Others? 
>> o Stéphane volunteered to lead this effort.
>> • Target date for completion of work and submission of input to
>> Stéphane & Glen for schedule planning: 15 September.
>> 9.2 Other issues?
>> 
>> Item 10: Drafting team for draft DNS-CERT/SSR WG charter (5 minutes)
>> 10.1 GNSO Volunteers:
>> • Terry Davis (NCA) 
>> • Rafik Dammak (NCSG) 
>> • Greg Aaron (RySG, Afilias) 
>> • Kathy Kleiman (RySG, PIR) 
>> • Keith Drazek (RySG, VeriSign) 
>> • Mike Rodenbaugh (CSG, CBUC) 
>> • Zahid Jamil (CSG, CBUC) 
>> • Rodney Joffe (RySG, NeuStar)
>> • Jaime Wagner (CSG, ISCPC)
>> 10.2 Status report (Chuck Gomes)
>> 
>> Item 11: Audio-casting of Council meetings (5 minutes)
>> 
>> 11.1 Refer to information sent to the Council list by Marika on 26 July
>> 2010.
>> 11.2 Implementation status
>> 11.3 Additional feedback?
>> 
>> Item 12: Other Business (10 minutes)
>> 
>> 12.1 Standing committee to monitor GNSO Improvement implementation
>> • Note: As part of the motion to approve implementation of the OSC CCT
>> recommendations, the Council resolved to convene a standing committee
>> whose role will be to monitor, coordinate, and manage the continuing
>> implementation of the various recommendations emanating from the
>> chartered GNSO Improvements Work Teams.
>> • Any suggestions regarding how to do this?
>> Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X,
>> Section 3)
>> 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or
>> the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO
>> Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of
>> each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the
>> following GNSO actions:
>> 1. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than
>> 25% vote of each House or majority of one House;
>> 2. Initiate a Policy Development Process (“PDP”) Within Scope (as
>> described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of
>> each House or more than 66% of one House;
>> 3. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of
>> more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House (“GNSO
>> Supermajority”);
>> 4. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires
>> an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires
>> that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4
>> Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation;
>> 5. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an
>> affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and
>> 6. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain
>> Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that “a
>> two-thirds vote of the council” demonstrates the presence of a
>> consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or
>> exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract
>> provision.
>> Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (Council Operating Procedures
>> 4.4)
>> Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on the
>> following items may vote by absentee ballot:
>> 1. Initiate a policy development process;
>> 2. Forward a policy recommendation to the Board;
>> 3. Recommend amendments to the ICANN Bylaws;
>> 4. Fill a position open for election.
>> The GNSO Secretariat will provide reasonable means for transmitting and
>> authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by
>> telephone, e- mail, or web-based interface. Absentee ballots must be
>> submitted within 72 hours following the start of the meeting in which a
>> vote is initiated, except that, in exceptional circumstances announced
>> at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or
>> extend the time to 7 days. There must be a quorum for the meeting in
>> which the vote is initiated.
>> ________________________________________
>> Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN
>> hemisphere
>> ________________________________________
>> Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) 15:00UTC
>> ________________________________________
>> California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 08:00
>> Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-6+1DST 10:00
>> New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 11:00
>> Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 12:00
>> Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 12:00
>> Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+1DST 16:00
>> Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 17:00
>> Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 17:00
>> Moscow, Russian Federation (MSK) UTC+3+1DST 19:00
>> Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 20:00
>> Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 23:00
>> Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 00:00
>> Melbourne/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+0DST 01:00 next day 
>> ________________________________________
>> The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2010, 2:00 or 3:00 local
>> time (with exceptions)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Pierce Law | University of New Hampshire - An Innovative Partnership
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Wendy Seltzer -- [log in to unmask]
> phone: +1.914.374.0613
> Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School
> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
> http://www.chillingeffects.org/
> https://www.torproject.org/

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
 Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
[log in to unmask]
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake
***********************************************************