<!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 6.00.2900.6058" name=GENERATOR><!-- converted from rtf -->
<STYLE>.EmailQuote {
PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 1pt; BORDER-LEFT: #800000 2px solid
}
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=109150410-09032011><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Kristina and Mary,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=109150410-09032011><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=109150410-09032011><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>just for my understanding since I haven't been deeply
involved in the matter: "improvements" or "amendments" to the RAA means the same
item?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><!-- Converted from text/rtf format --><BR>
<P><SPAN lang=de><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Best regards</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN lang=de><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Wolf-Ulrich</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=de dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>Von:</B> owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] <B>Im Auftrag von </B>Rosette,
Kristina<BR><B>Gesendet:</B> Mittwoch, 9. März 2011 03:38<BR><B>An:</B>
'council@gnso.icann.org'<BR><B>Betreff:</B> [council] Contingent RAA Motion
<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif" size=2>
<DIV>All,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I would like to propose an RAA motion that recommends that Staff adopt an
amended version of the process specified as Process B in the Final Report on
Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.
Process B was proposed by the Registrar Stakeholder Group members of the
Drafting Team. I am hopeful that the amended process ("Process B+") is
an acceptable compromise. As you will see from the final Whereas clause,
this motion is contingent on the failure of the motion Mary has just
introduced (and that I have seconded), and will be voted upon only if that
motion fails.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Safe travels to San Francisco.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>K</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-*-</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">Motion to Approve an Amended
Recommendation in the Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the
Registrar Accreditation Agreement.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">Whereas, on 4 March 2009, the GNSO Council
approved the form of the 2009 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA)
developed as a result of a lengthy consultative process initiated by
ICANN;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">Whereas, in addition to approving the 2009
RAA, on 4 March 2009 the GNSO Council convened a joint drafting team with
members of the At-Large Community, to conduct further work related to
improvements to the RAA; specifically to: (a) draft a charter identifying
registrant rights and responsibilities; and (b) develop a specific process to
identify additional potential amendments to the RAA on which further action
may be desirable;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">Whereas, on 18 October 2010, the Joint
GNSO/ALAC RAA Drafting Team published its Final Report describing specific
recommendations and proposals to the GNSO Council for improvements to the
RAA;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 18pt"><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">Whereas, the
GNSO Council has reviewed the Final Report and, in its resolution 20110113-2,
the GNSO Council approved of the Form of Registrant Rights and
Responsibilities Charter as described in Annex D of the Final Report and
recommended that Staff commence the consultation process with Registrars in
the RAA to finalize the Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Charter for
posting on the websites of Registrars as specified in Section 3.15 of the
RAA;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">Whereas, a GNSO Council motion
recommending that Staff adopt the process specified as Process A in the Final
Report to develop a new form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium
Priority topics described in the Final Report did not pass;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">Whereas, the GNSO Council desires to
approve an amended version of the process specified as Process B in the Final
Report to develop a new form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium
Priority topics described in the Final Report.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"><BR>RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council
recommends that Staff adopt an amended version of the process specified as
Process B in the Final Report to develop a new form of RAA with respect to the
High and Medium Priority topics described in the Final Report. As
amended herein, Process B entails:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">1. The prioritized list of topics as set
forth in the Final Report is sent to the GNSO Council and ICANN Staff for
identification of any topics that would require consensus policy development
rather than RAA contract amendment. This step shall be completed not
later than sixty (60) days after the date of this resolution.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">2. ICANN Staff will schedule a public
consultation, to be held at the first ICANN public meeting that occurs after
completion of the review in Step 1, to provide members of the ICANN community
with the opportunity to articulate their support of and/or objection to the
High and Medium Priority topics described in the Final Report.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">3. Within thirty (30) days after the
public consultation described in Step 2, negotiations begin with the
Negotiating Group consisting of ICANN Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder
Group (as a whole).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">4. The Negotiating Group shall
provide, for public comment, written reports monthly on the status and
progress of the negotiations. Such reports shall include proposed text
under consideration and identify items and text agreed upon by the Negotiating
Group. The monthly report shall identify (a) topics identified in the
Final Report as High or Medium Priority and that were not determined in Step 1
as requiring consensus policy development; and (b) proposed amendments put
forth by any Stakeholder Group, Constituency, and/or Advisory Committee
(collectively, the “Rejected Topics and Amendments”), if any, that have been
rejected by the Negotiating Group. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">5. The Negotiating Group reviews
public comments received and continues negotiations as necessary. Steps 4 and
5 shall repeat as necessary; provided, however, that the full final draft of
the new RAA must be posted for public comment not later than September 17,
2012. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">6. Subject to the date requirement
in Step 5, ICANN Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group shall determine
when the full final draft of the new RAA is ready to be posted for public
comment. The full final draft of the new RAA that is posted for public
comment shall be accompanied by a detailed written explanation, approved by
both Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group, that sets forth the basis for
the rejection of all Rejected Topics and Amendments.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">7. The GNSO Council shall review the
full final draft of the new RAA, consider public comments, and vote on
approval of the draft new RAA. A Supermajority vote of the GNSO Council is
required to approve the new RAA. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">8. If the GNSO Council approves the
new RAA, the new RAA goes to Board for approval.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">9. If the GNSO Council does not
approve the new RAA, the new RAA is sent back to the Negotiating Group with
appropriate feedback for reconsideration. Repeat from step
7.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif">RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council
recommends that this process be initiated by ICANN immediately.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, sans-serif" color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>