<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1019626545;
mso-list-template-ids:-1543345700;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1133408835;
mso-list-template-ids:1915670106;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:1208643923;
mso-list-template-ids:-1194674658;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:1265460469;
mso-list-template-ids:-1013517728;}
@list l3:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Zahid,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Great job! Sometimes the best that can be done is to preserve issues for another day, and that is far better than having them killed completely – especially when so much work has gone into them, and they are so important. Of the issues in Resolve #4, we should be most concerned about the Uniformity of Contracts issue, particularly in light of the newTLD program. But it is not worth a fight for high priority at the moment, given all of the other work before the Council.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Of course WHOIS access and accuracy are also critical concerns, though certainly not isolated within the RAP report. The RAA Amendments work, and various other initiatives also address WHOIS. Seems we should regroup on the overall WHOIS issues and strategy as a Constituency as those issues have dragged on so long. I suggest that we should set some time for that in our BC meeting in SF.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Mike<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Mike Rodenbaugh<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>RODENBAUGH LAW<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>tel/fax: +1 (415) 738-8087<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><a href="http://rodenbaugh.com/"><span style='color:blue'>http://rodenbaugh.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Berry Cobb<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, February 03, 2011 9:12 AM<br><b>To:</b> bc-GNSO@icann.org<br><b>Subject:</b> RE: [bc-gnso] Report on RAP Resolutions in the 3rd Feb 2011 GNSO Council meeting<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Zahid,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Thank you for driving this forward. I have not caught the MP3 yet, so I am flying IFR right now.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>While the overall outcome is positive, I do have a reservation about “Discussion Paper.” What does this mean, and what is the expected outcome? I’m guessing this is not defined in Council by-laws? Because there is no formal platform for Best Practices to be defined and implemented within the GNSO, by what structure will a future BP working group operate? <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Second, you state below in the positive outcomes, “</span><span lang=EN-GB>All recommendations of the RAP WG have been passed by the Council.” </span><span style='color:#1F497D'>Can you clarify, please? Several of those recommendations did not obtain Unanimous Consensus. The RAP WG and RAP IDT determined the Council should vote individually how the recommendation should proceed (essentially and up/down vote). Will the recommendations on the GNSO Project List be voted on as it works its way up on priority? Or will the Council vote the recommendation up or down in the near term and only those approved will be added to the list? <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>And my last question to anyone is who owns and drives the implementation of GNSO Projects List?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Thank you again Zahid!</span><span lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Berry Cobb<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Infinity Portals LLC<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>berrycobb@infinityportals.com<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>http://infinityportals.com<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>720.839.5735<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Zahid Jamil<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, February 03, 2011 8:03 AM<br><b>To:</b> bc-GNSO@icann.org<br><b>Subject:</b> [bc-gnso] Report on RAP Resolutions in the 3rd Feb 2011 GNSO Council meeting<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Dear Members,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><b><span lang=EN-GB>Report on the GNSO Council RAP WG Resolutions<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Today the GNSO Council passed the resolutions below wrt the RAP WG/RAP-IDT Reports. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>The Council Chair had suggested that each Resolved should be voted on separately<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>In discussions Steve Del Bianco had with Jeff Neuman (Registry) support was obtained for my amendments to the Council motion and some additional language on best practices. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Separately I reaching out to the NCSG’s Mary Wong (NCSG) proved helpful and we were able to agree on language that led to support of the NCSG Councillors. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>The quid pro quo for the NCSG voting in favour of all BC amendments was that BC would not vote down any of the resolved(s).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>In the Council meeting, the process was met with enormous opposition by the Registrars and in particular my observation was that Stephane, in his role as Chair, favoured an interpretation of the operating procedures to the effect that the proposed Resolutions would be simply taken off the table since one of the proposers Tim Ruiz (Registrar) had decided to withdraw his support as a seconder – this was despite advice from the ICANN General Counsel stating that the resolution could be sponsored by other councillors. Alternatively, the Chair was favouring a delay and deferral of the vote since the allotted time was running out – filibuster.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>I must mention that the support of Jeff Neuman, Mary Wong and in Staff Margie and Marika to what effectively was my Resolution on behalf of the BC was invaluable. Eventually, the Registrars accepted, with a few amendments, the Resolutions and all Resolutions were passed unanimously.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-GB>Disappointment:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>A disappointing compromise by all on the call with the Registrars of calling the Issues Report in Resolved 3 ‘discussion papers’. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-GB>Positive Outcomes:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>All recommendations of the RAP WG have been passed by the Council.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>The list of RAP Recommendations added as the 4<sup>th</sup> Resolved, which several members on the last call had suggested should be included have been specifically mentioned and we should now work on strategy for implementation.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>There was much common ground amongst the Registry, NCSG, CSG for passing the Resolutions on the Council viz-avis the attempt to block the resolutions by the Registrars.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>All parts of the motion passed unanimously.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>The motion as passed is below:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Motion in response to the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group (RAP WG) final report.</span></b><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group submitted its report to the GNSO Council on 29 May 2010 (see<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><a href="http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf),%E2%80%A8and"><span lang=EN-US style='color:#0020E3;text-decoration:none'>http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf</span><span lang=EN-US style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>),</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"MS Gothic";color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>
</span><span lang=EN-US style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>and</span></a></span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed the report and its recommendations and decided to form an implementation drafting team to draft a proposed</span><span style='font-family:"MS Gothic"'>
</span><span class=apple-converted-space><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>approach with regard to the recommendations contained in the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report, and</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Implementation Drafting Team submitted its proposed response to the GNSO Council on 15 November 2010</span><span style='font-family:"MS Gothic"'>
</span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>(see<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><a href="http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf"><span lang=EN-US style='color:#0020E3;text-decoration:none'>http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf</span></a></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>),</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>and</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Whereas the GNSO Council considered the proposed approached at its Working Session at the ICANN meeting in Cartagena.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>RESOLVED #1</span></b><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>, the GNSO Council instructs ICANN Policy Staff to forward the two issues identified by the RAP IDT as having low resource<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"MS Gothic"'>
</span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>requirements, WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1, to ICANN Compliance Staff for resolution. ICANN</span><span style='font-family:"MS Gothic"'>
</span><span class=apple-converted-space><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Compliance Staff is requested to provide the GNSO Council with its feedback on the two recommendations and proposed implementation in a timely manner.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>RESOLVED #2,</span></b><span class=apple-converted-space><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>the GNSO Council requests an Issues Report on the current state of the UDRP.<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>This effort should consider:</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><ul style='margin-top:0in' type=disc><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l2 level1 lfo3'><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>How the UDRP has addressed the problem of cybersquatting to date, and any insufficiencies/inequalities associated with the process.</span><span style='font-family:"MS Gothic"'>
</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l2 level1 lfo3'><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Whether the definition of cybersquatting inherent within the existing UDRP language needs to be reviewed or updated.</span><span style='font-family:"MS Gothic"'>
</span><span class=apple-converted-space><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>The Issue Report should include suggestions for how a possible PDP on this issue might be managed.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li></ul><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>RESOLVED #3</span></b><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>, the GNSO Council requests a discussion paper on the creation of non-binding best practices to help registrars and registries address the abusive registrations of domain names in accordance with the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>This effort should consider (but not be limited the following subjects:</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><ul style='margin-top:0in' type=disc><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Practices for identifying stolen credentials</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Practices for identifying and investigating common forms of malicious use (such as malware and phishing)</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Creating anti-abuse terms of service for possible inclusion in Registrar-Registrant agreements by registrars who adopt them, and for use by TLD operators who adopt them.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Identifying compromised/hacked domains versus domain registered by abusers</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Practices for suspending domain names</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Account access security management</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Security resources of use or interest to registrars and registries</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Survey registrars and registries to determine practices being used, and their adoption rates.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></li></ul><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>RESOLVED #4</span></b><span class=apple-converted-space><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>(As proposed by Zahid Jamil): Resolved, the GNSO Council instructs ICANN Policy Staff to add the remaining RAP Recommendations to the GNSO Project List so that the GNSO Council can keep track of the remaining recommendations and address these as appropriate.<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>These remaining RAP Recommendations are:</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>WHOIS Access – Recommendation #1: The GNSO should determine what additional research and processes may be needed to ensure that WHOIS data is accessible in an appropriately reliable, enforceable, and consistent fashion.</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>The GNSO Council should consider how such might be related to other WHOIS efforts, such as the upcoming review of WHOIS policy and implementation required by ICANN’s new Affirmation of Commitments.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span lang=FR style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Uniformity of Contracts:</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>View A: The RAPWG recommends the creation of an Issues Report to evaluate whether a minimum baseline of registration abuse provisions should be created for all in-scope ICANN agreements, and if created, how such language would be structured to address the most common forms of registration abuse.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>View B: Opposed to the recommendation for an Issues Report as expressed in view A</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names – Recommendation #1:</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Rough Consensus: Make no recommendation. The majority of RAPWG members expressed that gripe site and offensive domain names that use trademarks should be addressed in the context of cybersquatting and the UDRP for purposes of establishing consistent registration abuse policies in this area, and that creating special procedures for special classes of domains, such as offensive domain names, may present problems.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Alternate view: The URDP should be revisited to determine what substantive policy changes, if any, would be necessary to address any inconsistencies relating to decisions on “gripe” names and to provide for fast track substantive and procedural mechanisms in the event of the registration of deceptive domain names that mislead adults or children to objectionable sites.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span lang=FR style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=FR style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Cybersquatting – Recommendation #2:</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>View A: The RAPWG recommends the initiation of a Policy Development Process by requesting an Issues Report to investigate the appropriateness and effectiveness of how any Rights Protection Mechanisms that are developed elsewhere in the community (e.g. the New gTLD program) can be applied to the problem of cybersquatting in the current gTLD space.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>View B: The initiation of such a process is premature; the effectiveness and consequences of the Rights Protection Mechanisms proposed for the new TLDs is unknown. Discussion of RPMs should continue via the New TLD program. Experience with them should be gained before considering their appropriate relation (if any) to the existing TLD space.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Fake Renewal Notices – Recommendation #2 – conditional on #1: The following recommendation is conditional. The WG would like to learn the ICANN Compliance Department’s opinions regarding Recommendation #1 above, and the WG will further discuss Recommendation 2 looking forward to the WG’s Final Report.</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>The RAPWG recommends the initiation of a Policy Development Process by requesting an Issues Report to investigate fake renewal notices.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices: The RAPWG recommends that the GNSO, and the larger ICANN community in general, create and support structured, funded mechanisms for the collection and maintenance of best practices.</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Cross-TLD Registration Scam: The RAPWG recommends the GNSO monitor for Cross-TLD registration scam abuse in the gTLD space and co-ordinate research with the community to determine the nature and extent of the problem. The WG believes this issue warrants review but notes there is not enough data at this time to warrant an Issues Report or PDP.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Meta Issue - Uniformity of Reporting: The RAPWG recommends that the GNSO, and the larger ICANN community in general, create and support uniform reporting processes.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names – Recommendation #2:</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>View A: Turn down a proposed recommendation that registries develop best practices to restrict the registration of offensive strings.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>View B: Registries should consider developing internal best practice policies that would restrict the registration of offensive strings in order to mitigate the potential harm to consumers and children.</span><span lang=FR><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Domain Kiting / Tasting: It is unclear to what extent domain kiting happens, and the RAPWG does not recommend policy development at this time. The RAPWG suggests that the Council monitor the issue (in conjunction with ongoing reviews of domain-tasting), and consider next steps if conditions warrant.</span><span lang=FR style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Zahid Jamil<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Barrister-at-law<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Jamil & Jamil<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Barristers-at-law<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D'>219-221 Central Hotel Annexe<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Cell: +923008238230<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Fax: +92 21 35655026<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='color:#1F497D'><a href="http://www.jamilandjamil.com/"><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:9.0pt'>www.jamilandjamil.com</span></a></span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:#1F497D'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Notice / Disclaimer<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D'>This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of DNDRC, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of DNDRC is prohibited.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>