<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 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Gautami;
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
@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:"Times New Roman \(Body CS\)";
panose-1:2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3 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:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@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:1951736008;
mso-list-template-ids:-1537177298;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-.25in;}
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="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">It’s up, at <a href="https://gac.icann.org/advice/communiques/icann63%20gac%20communiqué.pdf">
https://gac.icann.org/advice/communiques/icann63%20gac%20communiqué.pdf</a> <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Below I pasted just the official GAC Advice part:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The following items of advice from the GAC to the Board have been reached on the basis of consensus as defined in the ICANN Bylaws<span style="position:relative;top:-5.0pt;mso-text-raise:5.0pt">5</span>:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#446696">1. Two-Character Country Codes at the Second Level
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">a. The GAC advises the Board to:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ol start="1" type="i">
<li style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Explain in writing how and why it considers it is implementing GAC advice on the release of country codes at the second level and
<o:p></o:p></span></li><li style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Explain in writing whether its Resolution of 8 November 2016 and its change from the preexisting release process (indicated in specification 5. 2 of the Registry Agreement,
sentence 1) to a new curative process (under sentence 2) are compatible with GAC advice on this topic, or whether it constitutes a rejection of GAC advice. The GAC advises the Board to set out its explanation in writing by 31 December 2018. Previous GAC advice
on this matter stands. <o:p></o:p></span></li><li style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Ensure that its direction to the ICANN CEO to “engage with concerned governments to listen to their views and concerns and further explain the Board’s decision making process”
(Board Resolution 2017.06.12.01) is fully implemented including direct engagement with those governments in order to fully address their concerns.
<o:p></o:p></span></li></ol>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">RATIONALE <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">This advice is adopted to support and oversee implementation by the Board of existing GAC Advice on the matter, including calling upon the Board to work towards resolution of countries concerns relating
to the release of country codes as a result of the withdrawal of the release process in 2016.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;position:relative;top:-4.0pt;mso-text-raise:4.0pt">5
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Bylaws section.12.2.(a)(x) The advice of the Governmental Advisory Committee on public policy matters shall be duly taken into account, both in the formulation and adoption of policies. In the event that the Board determines
to take an action that is not consistent with Governmental Advisory Committee advice, it shall so inform the Governmental Advisory Committee and state the reasons why it decided not to follow that advice. Any Governmental Advisory Committee advice approved
by a full Governmental Advisory Committee consensus, understood to mean the practice of adopting decisions by general agreement in the absence of any formal objection (“GAC Consensus Advice”), may only be rejected by a vote of no less than 60% of the Board,
and the Governmental Advisory Committee and the Board will then try, in good faith and in a timely and efficient manner, to find a mutually acceptable solution. The Governmental Advisory Committee will state whether any advice it gives to the Board is GAC
Consensus Advice. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#446696">2. IGO Protections
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">a. The GAC advises the Board to:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">i. facilitate a substantive, solutions-oriented dialogue between the GNSO and the GAC in an effort to resolve the longstanding issue of IGO protections, on which it reaffirms its previous advice, notably
with respect to the creation of a curative mechanism and maintenance of temporary protections.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">RATIONALE <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The GAC understands that the GNSO has decided at this stage to not vote on the final report for the PDP on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms, which adopted recommendations in
direct conflict with longstanding GAC advice. Noting the positive advancements achieved to bridge the gap between GNSO and GAC advice on identifiers for the Red Cross, the GAC remains optimistic that a substantive dialogue with the GSNO could help both sides
better understand the issues at play and reach a lasting solution that can provide IGOs with GAC-advised protections for their acronyms while addressing the concerns of the GNSO.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;background:#A3C1F2">VI. Follow-up on Previous Advice
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The following items reflect matters related to previous consensus advice provided to the Board.
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#446696">1. GDPR and WHOIS
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">We emphasize the GAC consensus advice from ICANN62 that urged ICANN to take all steps necessary to ensure the development and implementation of a
<span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">unified access model</span> that addresses accreditation, authentication, access and accountability, and applies to all contracted parties. We welcome ICANN’s efforts to facilitate the necessary community
discussion through the Unified Access Model papers and emphasize the need to drive these discussions towards concrete and timely results.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#446696">2. Dot Amazon Applications
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The GAC welcomes the 16 September 2018 Board resolution on the .Amazon applications directing the ICANN President and CEO “to support the development of a solution that would allow the .AMAZON applications
to move forward in a manner that would align GAC (Governmental Advisory Committee) advice and inputs on this topic”.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The GAC notes that the rationale of the 16 September 2018 Board resolution states that “[t]he Board is taking this action today to further the possibility of delegation of the .AMAZON applications
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Gautami",sans-serif">... </span>
<span style="font-size:12.0pt">while recognizing the public policy issues raised through GAC advice on these applications”.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The GAC recalls its latest advice on the matter where “[t]he GAC recognizes the need to find a mutually acceptable solution” for the Amazon countries and for the applicant, and calls upon the Board
to continue facilitating work that could result in such a solution (GAC Communiqué, Abu Dhabi, 1 November 2017).
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#446696">3. Protection of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Designations and Identifiers
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The GAC welcomes the progress made in the process of reconciliation between the GAC’s consistent advice and the GNSO’s past policy determinations on the issue of the protection of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent designations and identifiers and marks its appreciation for the inclusive consultative process conducted under the auspices of the GNSO's reconvened Working Group on the Red Cross and Red Crescent names.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The Board is encouraged to adopt the GNSO Council's recommendations, which regard the reservation of the list of names of the 191 National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies in relevant languages,
as well as of the international organizations within the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The GAC notes that the issue of the acronyms of the two international organizations within the Movement (ICRC and IFRC) were not covered under the abovementioned GNSO process and recalls standing GAC
Advice that the temporary protections presently accorded to these acronyms remain in place until such time an appropriate resolution of this issue is reached.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>