[EURO-Discuss] Agenda - ALAC call, January 13, any comments?

"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
Wed Jan 7 10:38:28 EST 2009


 
Dear Adam
 
no special points but from my point ov view it would be good if the ALAC discusses also formal aspects on how to produce "advise tp the board" and proposals how a procedure could be developed for the interaction among the Board and ALAC.
 
Best wishes
 
wolfgang
 
 
  

________________________________

Von: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org im Auftrag von Adam Peake
Gesendet: Di 06.01.2009 11:28
An: euro-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Betreff: [EURO-Discuss] Agenda - ALAC call, January 13, any comments?



Hi,

Draft agenda for the next ALAC teleconference has
been posted
<https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?13_january_2009>

Current text of the agenda below.

Does anyone have items they wish to add (or we
can try to have added) to the agenda?  Or
comments on any item on the agenda?   There is a
section for any RALO report should we have
anything to report.

Please note one item we should be considering:

    * What are the most useful issues to discuss
at the joint SO/AC meeting in Mexico? Each ICANN
constituency can propose 3 - 5 essential topics
(see current results of the 2nd At-Large summit
survey regarding issues of interest to ALSes)

Is there anything we wish to raise?

One issue Danny Younger requests action on is the
composition of the new GNSO noncommercial
stakeholder group. The GNSO NCUC has developed a
proposal, I think the most current version
attached (I will make sure and repost of not.)

Is EU RALO satisfied with this NCUC proposal?
Other RALOs seem not to be and the board has
asked that interested parties ensure the
interests of individual Internet users are
represented. If we do not support the NCUC
proposal, what do we suggest in its place, or
what amendments should be made.

As part of the GNSO reform there is also an
effort underway by NA RALO on "new
constituencies" that people might like to follow.
Archives here
<http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/new-constituencies_atlarge-lists.icann.org/>
(I think the archive open.)

I think Danny also makes good points about
problems with registrars and rather than
discussing as something that leads to a motion or
a action immediately, I would like this as an
issue for discussion when ALAC meets with the
Board on Mexico.  Does this sound reasonable?
And does anyone have anything to add about
Danny's concerns.  See his comments about
OnlineNic in particular.

Thanks,

Adam



A G E N D A
Standing Agenda Items

    1. Adoption of the Agenda ­ 1 min
    2. Roll Call Apologies from Members (if any) - 1 min
    3. Adoption of the 09 December 2008 Summary Minutes
    4. Review of the 09 December 2008 Action Items - 8 mins
    5. Review of current status of ALS
applications (Google Docs account needed to
access) - 5 mins
    6. Reports
    7. ExCom Activities
    8. Liaison reports

  Note: There will be no discussion of liaison
reports during the meeting; these links are by
way of information only. Any Liaison who wishes a
discussion to take place on an item related to
their brief, or has an item for which a decision
is required, is to use this wiki to edit the
sections under Items for Decision, or Items for
Discussion, as relevant.

           o IDN Report - at
https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?liaison_monthly_report
           o Board Liaison Report - (please place
a link to your report page here)
           o ccNSO Report - (please place a link to your report page here)
           o NCUC - (please place a link to your report page here)
           o SSAC - (please place a link to your report page here)
           o GNSO - (please place a link to your report page here)
           o dotMOBI Liaison Report

9. Working Group Reports: (Please insert below)
10. RALO Reports: (may be inserted below)

11. Issues to be raised at the ICANN Board Meeting
12. Ratification and Status of ALAC Statements (see Decision Items below)
13. Update on recent summit activities - Summit WG participants
Items for Decision at This Meeting:

     * Proposal to move the monthly ALAC Meeting
from the second Tuesday of the month at 1230 UTC
to the 4th Tuesday. If accepted, please use the
meeting planer to help find the most suitable
time.

     * ALAC Statement on the new gTLD Applicant
Guidebook (see
resource_page_for_alac_statement_on_new_gtld_guidebook
)

     * What are the most useful issues to discuss
at the joint SO/AC meeting in Mexico? Each ICANN
constituency can propose 3 - 5 essential topics
(see current results of the 2nd At-Large summit
survey regarding issues of interest to ALSes)

Items for Discussion Only

     * Draft ALAC comment on the PSC

Any Other Business
Reference Materials for Review

What is the process for adding additional items to the Agenda?

Thanks,
Danny Younger

contributed by Guest User on Dec 28 7:18am

I suggest Danny, that you write here your items
and all the ALAC members will be able to see them.
Thanks.
Sebastien Bachollet

contributed by Guest User on Dec 29 5:03am

Sebastien, please endeavor to get this item on the agenda.
Thanks,
Danny Younger

Topic: Proposed Letter to the Board

Dear members of the Board,

An ICANN-accredited registrar, OnlineNic, has
been found guilty by a court of competent
jurisdiction of cybersquatting (violations of the
U.S. Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act);
the court has awarded a $33.15 million judgment.
OnlineNic currently has almost 1.2 million domain
names under management and the registrant
community must be protected from the inevitable
impending demise of this registrar (who still
faces additional lawsuits from Yahoo! and
Microsoft). We are of the view that ICANN should
send a strong message that (1) cybersquatting
will never be tolerated and that (2) registrants
will always be protected, by immediately invoking
section 5.3.2.1 of the Registrar Accreditation
Agreement and terminating OnlineNic¹s
accreditation. We ask you to commence bulk
transfer arrangements in order to shift all
registrations away from OnlineNic to a more
suitable registrar.

contributed by Guest User on Dec 29 5:30pm

Topic: Continued Violations of Consensus Policy by GoDaddy

There is nothing more disgusting than watching
ICANN doing nothing in the face of continued
ongoing violations of Consensus Policy by a major
registrar. On the Radio GoDaddy show CEO Bob
Parsons and his General Counsel Christine
Williams discuss their firm's deliberate
violations of the Consensus Policy on
Inter-Registrar Tranfers -- see
http://bp.bobparsons.com/gdshop/bp/show.asp?ci=9963#
(the 12-17 segment featuring Andrew Alleman of
Domain Name Wire -- the discussion starts at 15
minutes and 30 seconds into the segment).
Registrants expect the rules to be enforced (no
matter who is breaking the rules). Will the ALAC
ever speak out about this abuse and defend the
registrant community? ...or will it continue to
bury its head in the sand?

contributed by Guest User on Dec 30 7:54am

Issues to be raised at the ICANN Board Meeting: Transparency

The bylaws state: "ICANN and its constituent
bodies shall operate to the maximum extent
feasible in an open and transparent manner and
consistent with procedures designed to ensure
fairness."

The BC never had a transparent publicly-archived
list. The registries have never had a transparent
list. We have seen the registrars move their
discussions to a private non-transparent forum.
The IPC no longer has a transparent discussion
list. This situation does not exemplify operating
"to the maximum extent feasible in an open and
transparent manner"; instead it demonstrates a
willingness on the part of ICANN constituencies
to flagrantly disregard the bylaws. We expect
ICANN to get its house in order. It would be
appropriate to ask the Board to show its resolve
not to re-certify any ICANN constituency that has
failed to demonstrate a maximum effort to ensure
transparency.

Danny

contributed by Guest User on Dec 30 8:32am

Topic: URGENT -- ALAC action required

"Resolved, (2008-12-11-02) the Board requests
that members of the GNSO community work with
members of the ALAC/At-Large community and
representatives of potential new "non-commercial"
constituencies to jointly develop a
recommendation for the composition and
organizational structure of a Non-Commercial
Stakeholder Group that does not duplicate the
ALAC and its supporting structures, yet ensures
that the gTLD interests of individual Internet
users (along with the broader non-commercial
community) are effectively represented within the
GNSO. This recommendation should be submitted no
later than 24 January 2009 for consideration by
the Board."

As of the ALAC's meeting date, the ALAC will have
only 11 days to come up with a plan for a NCSG
Charter, and this plan must be the result of
collaboration with GNSO community members and
constituency-in-formation representatives. When
do you plan to get started? ...or will the ALAC
just ignore yet another deadline? You know, for a
group that promised to act as a "facilitator" on
GNSO improvement matters, you sure haven't done
much facilitation.

Please let us know what you plan to do and by
when so that the members of the NARALO's WG on
New Constituencies may be kept informed.

Danny

contributed by Guest User on Dec 30 9:10am

Topic: PSC comments

To engender discussion, you may wish to review
the GAC Comments on the PSC Report 2 November
2008 -- see
http://open.nat.gov.tw/OpenFront/report/show_file.jsp?sysId=C09702989&fileNo=007

Danny

contributed by Guest User on Jan 5 1:16pm


(END)





More information about the EURO-Discuss mailing list