<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16788" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=479111301-04022009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Avri and all,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=479111301-04022009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=479111301-04022009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>We need to very quickly "<FONT face="Times New Roman"
color=#000000 size=3>identify some user representatives, especially individual
users, who would be willing to work with the ALAC and At-Large community to
develop a recommendation regarding the Board’s request</FONT>". Does the
NCUC have any recommendations? Should we seek some volunteers from the GA
list? Can anyone recommend an individual user?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=479111301-04022009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=479111301-04022009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Chuck</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Alan
Greenberg<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 02, 2009 4:20 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
council@gnso.icann.org<BR><B>Cc:</B> ALAC Working List<BR><B>Subject:</B>
[council] Motion on Individual Users in the GNSO.<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>At 29/01/2009 05:42 PM, Glen de Saint Géry wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">Motion 4<BR>Motion re: Individual
Users in the GNSO<BR>=======================================<BR>Motion
proposed by Chuck Gomes seconded by Bill Drake with friendly amendments by
Alan Greenberg <BR>Whereas:
<UL>
<LI>On 11 December 2008, the ICANN Board approved Resolution 2008-12-11-02
seeking a recommendation on how to incorporate the legitimate interests of
individual Internet users in the GNSO in constructive yet non-duplicative
ways and requesting that the recommendation should be submitted no later
than 24 January 2009 for consideration by the Board.
<LI>In an email message to the GNSO Council list dated 20 January 2009,
the ICANN Vice President, Policy Development clarified that the11 December
Resolution is an effort to help the Board identify a strategic solution
that balances ALAC/At-Large and GNSO opportunities for all user and
registrant stakeholders.
<LI>The Working Group on GNSO Council Restructuring Report sent to the
ICANN Board of Directors on 25 July 2008 recommended that the
Non-Contracted Party/User House would be open to membership of all
interested parties that use or provide services for the Internet, with the
obvious exclusion of the contracted parties and should explicitly not be
restricted to domain registrants as recommended by the BGC and that such
recommendation was made in response to the suggestion of the ALAC Liaison
to the Council.
<LI>The GNSO Council Chair previously contacted the ALAC Chair and the
GNSO ALAC Liaison to discuss this topic.
<LI>The potential members of the two GNSO Council Non-Contracted Party
Stakeholder Groups have been tasked with submitting proposed Stakeholder
Group Charters to the ICANN Board prior to the Board meeting on 6 March
2009. </LI></UL>Resolve:
<UL>
<LI>The Council requests the GNSO Council ALAC Liaison in consultation
with the ALAC Chair to:
<UL>
<LI>Determine whether the ALAC and At-Large community have any concerns
with regard to the recommendation that membership in the Non-Contracted
Party/User House would be open to individual Internet users in addition
to domain name registrants and, if so, to communicate those concerns to
the GNSO Council as soon as practical </LI></UL></LI></UL></BLOCKQUOTE>
<UL></UL>
<UL></UL>The ALAC and At-Large continue to support having users (which
includes registrants) involved in the Non-contracted Party/User House of the
GNSO. Our initial reply to the Board is appended below.
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">
<UL>
<UL>
<LI>Determine whether the ALAC and At-Large community would like the
GNSO to identify some user representatives, especially individual users,
who would be willing to work with the ALAC and At-Large community to
develop a recommendation regarding the Board’s request that could be
forwarded to the appropriate groups for their consideration in
developing a stakeholder group charter and to the Board for action on
GNSO improvement recommendations. </LI></UL></UL></BLOCKQUOTE>
<UL></UL>
<UL></UL>We are most certainly interested. As noted in our initial response to
the Board, we are committed to responding to the Board by February 20. Our
intent is to try to reach some common ground with the GNSO-names individuals.
To the extent that we do or do not meet this goal, our response to the Board
will note it.<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">If in either case the ALAC or
At-large community do not accept this proposal the GNSO council may
reconsider the issue.
<UL>
<UL>
<LI>Provide weekly progress reports to the Council list regarding the
above. <BR><BR></LI></UL>
<LI>The Council directs the Council Chair to:
<UL>
<LI>Apologize to the Board that it failed to meet the Board established
deadline of 24 January
<LI>Inform the Board that the GNSO:
<UL>
<LI>Is awaiting information from the ALAC.
<LI>Is willing in cooperation with users to identify user
representatives, especially individual users, who would be willing to
work with the ALAC and At-Large community to develop a recommendation.
<LI>Will promptly consider next steps and respond to the Board as
quickly as possible after requested information is received from the
ALAC as well any recommendation that may be developed by the ALAC and
At-Large community. </LI></UL></LI></UL></LI></UL>The motion passed
unanimously by voice vote </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>*Letter from the Chair of the
ALAC to the Chair of the Board of ICANN*<BR><BR>I write to you today in
connection with ICANN Board Resolution 2008-12-11-02.<BR><BR>Whilst the
resolution asked that a recommendation on the modalities for including
Individual Internet users in the GNSO should be presented to the board by
24^th January, the various parties have been unable to conclude work in the
timeframe provided. Considering that much of the available time between 11^th
December and 24^th January was over the festive season, I'm sure you and the
other board members will understand that whilst we are working on the
question, as volunteers during a major family holiday we have had less time
for this issue than would otherwise be the case.<BR><BR>With respect to
At-Large we are also very busy with new gTLDs, the ALAC Review, and the
organisation of the At-Large Summit; the Board's request really couldn't have
come at a worse time.<BR><BR>Nevertheless we are working on the question. I
have had discussions with Avri Doria, GNSO Council Chair, on how to convene
the various interested parties and I compliment her efforts to encourage
constructive work on this question. Unfortunately the modalities for joint
work by all interested parties has in itself proven controversial enough that
no meeting of that kind has taken place yet, it does appear that things are
moving in a positive direction and that discussions of a suitably
representative nature will be forthcoming.<BR><BR>In the meantime, At-Large
has convened a regionally-balanced ad-hoc working group and we have committed
to having a considered response not later than 20^th February, irrespective of
what efforts involving broader interests is able to produce.<BR><BR>What we
can say to you at this point is the following:<BR><BR> * At-Large
and ALAC does not believe that the answer to
individual<BR> Internet user participation in the GNSO
requires -- or is even<BR> well-served -- by simply
inserting the At-Large community's<BR> structures into
the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group. In fact, we<BR>
believe that would be both confusing to the community and
quite<BR> counterproductive.<BR> * The
concept of opening the GNSO to "users" instead of<BR>
"registrants" was included in the Report of the Working Group
on<BR> GNSO Council Restructuring at the instigation
of the ALAC. We<BR> remain convinced that the GNSO
must include meaningful<BR> participation for those
speaking on behalf of individual Internet<BR> users
within both the commercial and non-commercial
stakeholder<BR> groups. But to be clear, our
definition of "user" includes<BR>
registrants.<BR> * "meaningful participation" in this context
means that those<BR> engaged on behalf of individual
Internet users must feel that<BR> their voices are
influential and effective and equal to the voices<BR>
of other groups in their Stakeholder Group. Without this, there
is<BR> no chance that new players can be drawn into
the GNSO community.<BR> * We have seen the draft NCUC petition and
charter for the NCSG,<BR> held a meeting with members
of the NCUC during the ICANN Cairo<BR> meeting to
discuss it and we continue to evaluate the
proposal.<BR> Without prejudice to that proposal, we
believe that the ultimate<BR> structure of the NCSG
must provide a place where all voices and<BR> views
can be heard on the questions of the day, and where
the<BR> structures of the NCSG ensure that no voice is
disenfranchised and<BR> in particular that individual
personalities are unable to impose<BR> their views on
others. Just as "takeover" is an issue within
ICANN<BR> as a whole, it is also an issue within a
SG.<BR><BR>Whilst I know that the above is not all that you hoped to receive
from us this month, I hope that you will find it useful and we look forward to
concluding our work on this question, as soon as possible.<BR><BR>Of course if
you or your colleagues require clarification on any of the above, I, our
ALAC Executive, and the Working Group established for this topic, remain at
your service.<BR><BR><BR>Kindest regards,<BR><BR>(Signed on behalf the ALAC
ad-hoc WG on NCSG : GNSO Improvements Implementation)<BR><BR>Cheryl
Langdon-Orr<BR>ALAC Chair 2007-2009<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>