These are excellent additions, thank you, Amr! I think they will serve
the NCSG, the Implementation WG and ICANN well.
Re: the EDRP, it may help the discussions with other members of the WG
to share that the regular review of consensus policies is already a part
of the policy development process (e.g., like the much anticipated UDRP
review starting in November) and to do this type of review in context
and with appropriate reports is very important. EDRP seems appropriate
for what we have may have missed in the first place - filling in the gaps.
Best and tx!
Kathy
On 3/16/2015 9:23 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> Hi Kathy,
>
> To summarise some of the changes we are proposing to recommend in the
> NCSG response to the GNSO Guidance Process (GGP) and Expedited Policy
> Development Process (EPDP):
>
> 1. That the voting threshold required to initiate, both a GGP and
> EPDP, be a supermajority of votes on the GNSO Council. This is to
> avoid these processes being used to trump a traditional PDP, which is
> more exhaustive in scoping the issue, and the opportunity for public
> comment along the process.
>
> 2. The GGP is meant to allow the GNSO to address question, when the
> answer will not require any new contractual obligations on contracted
> parties. Following Tuesday’s webinar, this was added:
>
>> Furthermore, A GGP is not intended to be used when the expected
>> outcome may result in new
>> contractual obligations to contracted parties. Similarly, the NCSG
>> feels it is important that the
>> prerequisites for not using a GGP explicitly include that there will
>> also be no new obligations
>> (contractual or otherwise) on registrants. Examples of obligations on
>> registrants that may not require changes made to contracts between
>> ICANN and registries or registrars include changes to the UDRP or
>> URS. Such changes should be made using another process, preferably a
>> traditional PDP.
>
> 3. Regarding your question on the EPDP, I’m not sure if this answers
> your question or not, but please let me know. This has been included
> in the feedback on the applicability of EPDP as a process:
>
>> Furthermore, the NCSG believes that an EPDP should not be used to
>> reopen a policy that had
>> previously been deliberated upon, and rejected. To reconvene a
>> discussion on a previously rejected policy, an issue scoping phase of
>> a PDP (not included in the EPDP) should be included to scope the
>> policy issue in order to determine wether or not there are new
>> circumstances that have been recognized that require that a policy
>> issue be revisited and reversed. This additional criteria for
>> applicability does not conflict with those already being recommended
>> in Annex E of the report.
>
> My thinking is (I believe) precisely consistent with yours. Adding
> this as a criteria of applicability of EPDPs, in addition to the high
> voting threshold required to initiate one, should hopefully do the
> trick. Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
>
> I apologize for this being cut out of the PDF page. Not my doing. I
> also attached a free text file with the complete text, but it’s a bit
> of a mess to go through. If the PC endorses the responses, I will
> submit the answers directly to surveymonkey on the Web page.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Amr
>
> On Mar 16, 2015, at 1:39 PM, Kathy Kleiman <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Amr,
>> In one of the excellent session that you and Avri gave to discuss
>> this Initial Report, an issue came up that the scope of the Expedited
>> Policy Development Process -- that allowing the GNSO to revisit any
>> policy issue at any time (even if the initial proceeding just
>> finished and was a very hard-fought compromise) might be too broad.
>> That we should save Expedited Policy Development processes for areas
>> *not considered* in the initial policy development process -- perhaps
>> something now deemed critical for implementation, but not even
>> conceived (or focused on) in the initial process.
>>
>> The example we used was the "Brand Registries" seeking a change to
>> the Applicant Guidebook and the "base registry agreement" set out in
>> the Applicant Guidebook -- a new wrinkle and one that did need to be
>> treated rapidly as Applications were in and processing rapidly...
>>
>> The PDF seems to be cut off on this issue (I know you are cutting and
>> pasting from an online form - which we appreciate!). Could you kindly
>> address who you phrased the revised response from the SG on this
>> issue? It would be very difficult to continue to re-fight battles
>> again and again... and it would be nice to have a substantive
>> limitation (a clear bar or a very high bar to reconsideration of
>> debated and "closed" policy matters) in addition to a procedural one
>> (a vote of Council).
>>
>> Best and tx!
>> Kathy
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I’ve attached an updated version of the NCSG response to the public
>>> comment period for the Policy and Implementation WG initial report
>>> to this email. In it, I’ve tried to consolidate the excellent
>>> feedback provided from last week’s NCSG webinar.
>>>
>>> There is some text that can’t be read on page 4 of the document, so
>>> I’m adding it here. You can only find it if you save the whole
>>> document as free text. This text is particularly important because
>>> it includes a somewhat contentious issue we discussed last Tuesday.
>>>
>>>> Support of the GNSO Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) is
>>>> provisional to the same
>>>> change in voting threshold being required for initiation of the
>>>> process as the GGP, and for the same reasons. Additionally, Annex E
>>>> #4 of the report states that "At the request of any Council member
>>>> duly and timely submitted and seconded as a motion, the Council may
>>>> initiate the EPDP by a Supermajority vote of the Council in favor
>>>> of initiating the EPDP. A motion which fails to carry a
>>>> Supermajority vote of Council may be resubmitted at the same
>>>> Council meeting as a motion to
>>>> initiate a GNSO Guidance Process". In the event that a vote
>>>> confirming the initiation of an EPDP
>>>> fails, it would be necessary for the voting threshold required to
>>>> initiate a GGP be a supermajority
>>>> vote in favor, also for the reasons mentioned above.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, the NCSG believes that an EPDP should not be used to
>>>> reopen a policy that had
>>>> previously been deliberated upon, and rejected. To reconvene a
>>>> discussion on a previously rejected policy, an issue scoping phase
>>>> of a PDP (not included in the EPDP) should be included to scope the
>>>> policy issue in order to determine wether or not there are new
>>>> circumstances that have been recognized that require that a policy
>>>> issue be revisited and reversed. This additional criteria for
>>>> applicability does not conflict with those already being
>>>> recommended in Annex E of the report.
>>>
>>> For clarification, we had agreed to include input addressing this
>>> issue in the “Principles” section of the report. I was, at the time,
>>> in agreement on this. However, on review of the report, I found this
>>> difficult to do considering that the principles are very general in
>>> their nature, and do not specifically address any of the new
>>> processes being suggested by the WG. I hope the language I added
>>> addresses this in a satisfactory manner, but please let me know if
>>> there are any thoughts to the contrary.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Amr
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 6, 2015, at 1:03 PM, Maryam Bakoshi <[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> Please find below participation details for the NCSG Webinar on the
>>>> Initial Report of the GNSO Policy and Implementation Working Group
>>>> call on *Tuesday 10th March at 19:00 UTC*.
>>>>
>>>> *Adobe Connect: *https://icann.adobeconnect.com/_a819976787/ncsg/
>>>>
>>>> *Time Zones:*
>>>> http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1&lid=100,8,5&h=100&date=2015-3-10&sln=19-21
>>>>
>>>> *Public Comment link:*
>>>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/policy-implementation-2015-01-19-en
>>>>
>>>> *Draft Response: *Attached
>>>>
>>>> *Passcodes/Pin codes:*
>>>> Participant passcode: NCSG PC
>>>>
>>>> *For security reasons, the passcode will be required to join the
>>>> conference.*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Dial in numbers:*
>>>> *Country*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Toll Numbers*
>>>>
>>>> *Freephone/
>>>> Toll Free Number*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ARGENTINA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-777-0519
>>>>
>>>> AUSTRALIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ADELAIDE:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 61-8-8121-4842
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-800-657-260
>>>>
>>>> AUSTRALIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BRISBANE:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 61-7-3102-0944
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-800-657-260
>>>>
>>>> AUSTRALIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> CANBERRA:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 61-2-6100-1944
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-800-657-260
>>>>
>>>> AUSTRALIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MELBOURNE:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 61-3-9010-7713
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-800-657-260
>>>>
>>>> AUSTRALIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PERTH:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 61-8-9467-5223
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-800-657-260
>>>>
>>>> AUSTRALIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> SYDNEY:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 61-2-8205-8129
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-800-657-260
>>>>
>>>> AUSTRIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 43-1-92-81-113
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-005-259
>>>>
>>>> BELGIUM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 32-2-400-9861
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-3-8795
>>>>
>>>> BRAZIL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 55-11-3958-0779
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-7610651
>>>>
>>>> CHILE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1230-020-2863
>>>>
>>>> CHINA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> CHINA A:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 86-400-810-4789
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 10800-712-1670
>>>>
>>>> CHINA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> CHINA B:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 86-400-810-4789
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 10800-120-1670
>>>>
>>>> COLOMBIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 01800-9-156474
>>>>
>>>> CROATIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 080-08-06-309
>>>>
>>>> CZECH REPUBLIC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 420-2-25-98-56-64
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-700-177
>>>>
>>>> DENMARK
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 45-7014-0284
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 8088-8324
>>>>
>>>> ESTONIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-011-1093
>>>>
>>>> FINLAND
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 358-9-5424-7162
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0-800-9-14610
>>>>
>>>> FRANCE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LYON:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 33-4-26-69-12-85
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 080-511-1496
>>>>
>>>> FRANCE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MARSEILLE:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 33-4-86-06-00-85
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 080-511-1496
>>>>
>>>> FRANCE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PARIS:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 33-1-70-70-60-72
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 080-511-1496
>>>>
>>>> GERMANY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 49-69-2222-20362
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-664-4247
>>>>
>>>> GREECE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 30-80-1-100-0687
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 00800-12-7312
>>>>
>>>> HONG KONG
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 852-3001-3863
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-962-856
>>>>
>>>> HUNGARY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 36-1-700-8856
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 06-800-12755
>>>>
>>>> INDIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BANGALORE:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 91-80-61275204
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> INDIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MUMBAI:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 91-22-61501629
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> INDIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> INDIA A:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 000-800-852-1268
>>>>
>>>> INDIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> INDIA B:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 000-800-001-6305
>>>>
>>>> INDIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> INDIA C:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1800-300-00491
>>>>
>>>> INDONESIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 001-803-011-3982
>>>>
>>>> IRELAND
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 353-1-246-7646
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1800-992-368
>>>>
>>>> ISRAEL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-80-9216162
>>>>
>>>> ITALY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MILAN:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 39-02-3600-6007
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-986-383
>>>>
>>>> ITALY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ROME:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 39-06-8751-6018
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-986-383
>>>>
>>>> ITALY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TORINO:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 39-011-510-0118
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-986-383
>>>>
>>>> JAPAN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OSAKA:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 81-6-7878-2631
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0066-33-132439
>>>>
>>>> JAPAN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TOKYO:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 81-3-6868-2631
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0066-33-132439
>>>>
>>>> LATVIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 8000-3185
>>>>
>>>> LUXEMBOURG
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 352-27-000-1364
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 8002-9246
>>>>
>>>> MALAYSIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-800-81-3065
>>>>
>>>> MEXICO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> GUADALAJARA (JAL):
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 52-33-3208-7310
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 001-866-376-9696
>>>>
>>>> MEXICO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MEXICO CITY:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 52-55-5062-9110
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 001-866-376-9696
>>>>
>>>> MEXICO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MONTERREY:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 52-81-2482-0610
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 001-866-376-9696
>>>>
>>>> NETHERLANDS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 31-20-718-8588
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-023-4378
>>>>
>>>> NEW ZEALAND
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 64-9-970-4771
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-447-722
>>>>
>>>> NORWAY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 47-21-590-062
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-15157
>>>>
>>>> PANAMA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 011-001-800-5072065
>>>>
>>>> PERU
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-53713
>>>>
>>>> PHILIPPINES
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 63-2-858-3716
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1800-111-42453
>>>>
>>>> POLAND
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 00-800-1212572
>>>>
>>>> PORTUGAL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 8008-14052
>>>>
>>>> ROMANIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 40-31-630-01-79
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> RUSSIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 8-10-8002-0144011
>>>>
>>>> SAUDI ARABIA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-8-110087
>>>>
>>>> SINGAPORE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 65-6883-9230
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-120-4663
>>>>
>>>> SLOVAK REPUBLIC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 421-2-322-422-25
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-002066
>>>>
>>>> SOUTH AFRICA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 080-09-80414
>>>>
>>>> SOUTH KOREA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 82-2-6744-1083
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 00798-14800-7352
>>>>
>>>> SPAIN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 34-91-414-25-33
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 800-300-053
>>>>
>>>> SWEDEN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 46-8-566-19-348
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0200-884-622
>>>>
>>>> SWITZERLAND
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 41-44-580-6398
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-120-032
>>>>
>>>> TAIWAN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 886-2-2795-7379
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 00801-137-797
>>>>
>>>> THAILAND
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 001-800-1206-66056
>>>>
>>>> TURKEY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 00-800-151-0516
>>>>
>>>> UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 8000-35702370
>>>>
>>>> UNITED KINGDOM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BIRMINGHAM:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 44-121-210-9025
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0808-238-6029
>>>>
>>>> UNITED KINGDOM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> GLASGOW:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 44-141-202-3225
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0808-238-6029
>>>>
>>>> UNITED KINGDOM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LEEDS:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 44-113-301-2125
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0808-238-6029
>>>>
>>>> UNITED KINGDOM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LONDON:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 44-20-7108-6370
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0808-238-6029
>>>>
>>>> UNITED KINGDOM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MANCHESTER:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 44-161-601-1425
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0808-238-6029
>>>>
>>>> URUGUAY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 000-413-598-3421
>>>>
>>>> USA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1-517-345-9004
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 866-692-5726
>>>>
>>>> VENEZUELA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0800-1-00-3702
>>>>
>>>> *Restrictions may exist when accessing freephone/toll free numbers
>>>> using a mobile telephone.*
>>>>
>>>> <Mail Attachment.ics><NCSG response to PI WG initial report survey
>>>> questions - Draft.pdf>
>>>
>>
>
|
