https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43983094
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Dear WG members,
Please find attached both a clean and marked-up (red-lined)
version of the updated draft Final Report. As the marked-up
version may be somewhat difficult to read given the number of
paragraphs moved around, added to or deleted, we hope the clean
version will be helpful in providing a straightforward read of
the proposed final form of the WG recommendations while the
mark-up will show where the changes were made from the draft
report that was circulated on 8 October.
As noted in the WG Work Plan, circulation of this updated
document opens the period for the WG’s consensus call. Following
this, in accordance with the GNSO's WG Guidelines, the WG
co-chairs will make a final evaluation of the consensus support
levels and, if necessary, assign specific designations of such
to each individual WG recommendation. Any minority statements
must therefore also be submitted by that time. As noted in the
WG Work Plan, the co-chairs plan to close the consensus call
period by Monday 7 December 2015. Unless determined
otherwise as a result of this consensus period, the
recommendations are currently marked as Full Consensus of the
WG.
For your convenience, the main changes that were made to the
draft report include the following:
- All the substantive changes can be seen in the Executive
Summary, which retain the format and numbering of the
recommendations from the earlier draft. Most of the additional
WG conclusions based on discussions subsequent to 8 October
were added to existing numbered recommendations. The relevant
portions of Section V (WG Deliberations) and VII (WG Final
Recommendations) have also been updated to reflect the
substantive changes to the numbered WG recommendations in the
Executive Summary. Most of the rest of the report, and much of
even Sections and VII, remain unchanged from both the Initial
Report (May 2015) and the draft Final Report.
- The final version of the Illustrative Disclosure Framework
reflecting the consensus of Sub Team 3 has been incorporated
into the report as Annex B. Please note that the final
recommendation includes only one option for dispute
resolution, which is jurisdiction over arbitration, in
language discussed by the WG and finalized by the Sub Team.
There is also a recommendation for a post-implementation
review of the overall framework, followed by periodic reviews
thereafter.
- On transfers, you will see from the recommendations that
language has been added, in particular to #8 and #21. The
former makes reference to the effect of IRTP-C, and the
latter – in relation to de-accreditation – adds a specific
recommendation to the effect that a registrar must lift the
otherwise-required lock under IRTP-C if so requested by the
beneficial user of a proxy registration. This
recommendation is based on the narrower option presented by
the Registrar Services team to the WG following the WG call
earlier this week. We have also retained the original WG
recommendation that the next review of the IRTP expressly
include consideration of the effect on P/P registrations.
- On de-accreditation, we have replaced the original specific
individual recommendations with the new set of three general
principles recently reviewed by the WG.
- On definitions, we have included those for a Privacy Service
and a Proxy Service in the list of definitions, and added the
most recent version of the new, supplemental language about
registrars not knowingly accepting registrations from
accredited (versus unaccredited) P/P service providers, and
the consequence that an unaccredited provider effectively
therefore has all the responsibility of a Registered Name
Holder.
- On LEA, we have added language to reflect the WG’s further
agreement in Dublin about “importing” a few critical elements
from the Illustrative Disclosure Framework into a suggestion
that these be included in any future LEA request framework
that may be developed.
- In the general recommendation section, we have added
recommendations based on the work of Sub Team 3, as discussed
by the WG in Dublin, for an educational/outreach program and
for the periodic provision of aggregated statistics to ICANN
by providers.
- Elsewhere, we have added or edited language, again based on
the WG’s discussions in Dublin and subsequently, to flesh out
or clarify existing recommendations. Most of these are
indicated with a comment box explaining where the change came
from.
Thanks to everyone, especially our co-chairs and the various
Sub-Teams, for facilitating our progress toward a Final Report!
Cheers
Mary
Mary Wong
Senior Policy
Director
Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1
603 574 4889