<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; font-size:10pt;"><div>What Wendy is proposing is not just an amendment, it is a whole new motion. In any event, we have no way to review with our SG at this point.<BR></div>
<div><BR></div>
<div>Tim </div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 8px; FONT-FAMILY: verdana; COLOR: black; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=replyBlockquote webmail="1">
<DIV id=wmQuoteWrapper>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: AW: [council] Proposed Amendment to RAA Motion<BR>From: <<a href="mailto:KnobenW@telekom.de">KnobenW@telekom.de</a>><BR>Date: Wed, October 26, 2011 10:11 am<BR>To: <<a href="mailto:tim@godaddy.com">tim@godaddy.com</a>>, <<a href="mailto:wendy@seltzer.com">wendy@seltzer.com</a>><BR>Cc: <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><BR><BR><BR>Tim,<BR><BR>Do I understand you going against the - existing - motion whatever amendments may be suggested?<BR>Maybe I misinterprete what "unproductive rounds" mean.<BR><BR>Kind regards<BR>Wolf-Ulrich <BR><BR><BR>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<BR>Von: <a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>] Im Auftrag von Tim Ruiz<BR>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Oktober 2011 16:55<BR>An: Wendy Seltzer<BR>Cc: Council GNSO<BR>Betreff: RE: [council] Proposed Amendment to RAA Motion<BR><BR><BR>Instead of getting into another round of potentally non-productive<BR>dicussions about this motion, given the recent RrSG announcement, can we<BR>simply agree to withdraw it and let us move on and just le us get the<BR>work done? I do not want to see anything potentially derail it at this<BR>point.<BR><BR>Tim <BR><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: [council] Proposed Amendment to RAA Motion<BR>From: Wendy Seltzer <<a href="mailto:wendy@seltzer.com">wendy@seltzer.com</a>><BR>Date: Wed, October 26, 2011 9:42 am<BR>To: Council GNSO <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><BR><BR><BR>Colleagues,<BR><BR>In light of our interest in proceeding quickly to amend the RAA, I<BR>propose an amendment to streamline process B and preserve important<BR>opportunities for transparency and public comment.<BR>Further, as the NCUC does not support many of the identified<BR>"high-priority items," I have removed their endorsement from the<BR>resolveds.<BR><BR>Below I include an updated version of the resolveds my amendment would<BR>create and a redline of the whole against the original motion.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR>--Wendy<BR><BR>RESOLVED,<BR>that the GNSO Council recommends that Staff adopt an amended version of<BR>the process specified as Process B in the Final Report to develop a new<BR>form of RAA. As amended herein, Process B entails:<BR><BR>1. A 60-day public comment period shall be open from Monday 31<BR>October, to provide members of the ICANN community with the opportunity<BR>to give feedback on the topics described in the Final Report, including<BR>the opportunity to raise considerations and concerns arising since the<BR>Report was issued.<BR><BR>2. ICANN Staff will schedule a public consultation at the ICANN<BR>public meeting in Costa Rica, to provide members of the ICANN community<BR>with the opportunity to give further feedback, including feedback based<BR>on comments received during the public comment period, so as to inform<BR>the negotiations between ICANN staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group<BR>as a whole (the "Negotiating Group").<BR><BR>3. Within sixty (60) days after the public consultation described<BR>in Step 2, negotiations begin with the Negotiating Group consisting<BR>of ICANN Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group (as a whole).<BR><BR>4. The Negotiating Group shall provide, for public comment,<BR>bimonthly written reports on the status and progress of the<BR>negotiations. Such reports shall include proposed text under<BR>consideration and identify items and text agreed upon by the<BR>Negotiating Group. Each bimonthly report shall identify the status of<BR>(a)<BR>topics identified in Step 2 and that were not determined to<BR>require consensus policy development; and (b) proposed amendments put<BR>forth by any Stakeholder Group, Constituency, and/or Advisory Committee;<BR>and shall identify such topics, if any, that have been rejected by<BR>the Negotiating Group (collectively, the "Rejected Topics and<BR>Amendments").<BR><BR>5. The Negotiating Group shall review public comments received and<BR>continue negotiations as necessary. Steps 4 and 5 shall repeat as<BR>necessary; provided, however, that the full final draft of the new<BR>RAA must be posted for public comment not later than March 4,<BR>2013.<BR><BR>6. Subject to the date requirement in Step 5, ICANN Staff and the<BR>Registrar Stakeholder Group shall determine when the full final<BR>draft of the new RAA is ready to be posted for public comment. The<BR>full final draft of the new RAA that is posted for public comment<BR>shall be accompanied by a detailed written explanation, approved<BR>by both Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group, that sets forth<BR>the basis for the rejection of all Rejected Topics and Amendments.<BR><BR>7. The GNSO Council shall review the full final draft of the new<BR>RAA, consider public comments, and vote on approval of the draft<BR>new RAA. A Supermajority vote of the GNSO Council is required to<BR>approve the new RAA.<BR><BR>8. If the GNSO Council approves the new RAA, the new RAA goes to<BR>Board for approval.<BR><BR>9. If the GNSO Council does not approve the new RAA, the new RAA<BR>is sent back to the Negotiating Group with appropriate feedback<BR>for reconsideration. Repeat from step 7.<BR><BR>RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council recommends that this<BR>process be initiated by ICANN immediately.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>REDLINE against the current motion at<BR><<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+26+October+2011>">https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+26+October+2011></a>;<BR><BR>>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;<BR>>><BR>>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;<BR>>><BR>>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;<BR>>><BR>>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;<BR>>><BR>>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;<BR>>><BR>>Whereas, a previous GNSO Council motion 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 did not pass at the GNSO Council's April 7, 2011 meeting;<BR>>><BR>>Whereas, the GNSO Council desires to approve a further amended version of the process specified as Process B in the Final Report to develop a new form of RAA <BR>[[REMOVE with respect to the High and Medium Priority topics described<BR>in the Final Report.]]<BR>>><BR>>NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:<BR>>><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 <BR>[[REMOVE with respect to the High and Medium Priority topics described<BR>in the Final Report.]]<BR>>As amended herein, Process B entails:<BR><BR>[[REPLACE steps 1 and 2 with<BR>1. A 60-day public comment period shall be open from Monday 31<BR>October, to provide members of the ICANN community with the opportunity<BR>to give feedback on the topics described in the Final Report, including<BR>the opportunity to raise considerations and concerns arising since the<BR>Report was issued.<BR><BR>2. ICANN Staff will schedule a public consultation at the ICANN<BR>public meeting in Costa Rica, to provide members of the ICANN community<BR>with the opportunity to give further feedback, including feedback based<BR>on comments received during the public comment period, so as to inform<BR>the negotiations between ICANN staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group<BR>as a whole (the "Negotiating Group").<BR>]]<BR><BR>>3. Within sixty (60) 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).<BR>>><BR>>4. The Negotiating Group shall provide, for public comment, bimonthly written reports 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. Each bimonthly report shall identify the status of (a) topics identified in <BR>[[REPLACE with Step 2]<BR>> and that were not determined in Step 1 as requiring consensus policy<BR>> development; and (b) proposed amendments put forth by any Stakeholder<BR>> Group, Constituency, and/or Advisory Committee; and shall identify such<BR>> topics, if any, that have been rejected by the Negotiating Group<BR>> (collectively, the "Rejected Topics and Amendments").<BR>>><BR>>5. The Negotiating Group shall review public comments received and continue 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 March 4, 2013.<BR>>><BR>>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.<BR>>><BR>>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.<BR>>><BR>>8. If the GNSO Council approves the new RAA, the new RAA goes to Board for approval.<BR>>><BR>>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.<BR>>><BR>>RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council recommends that this process be initiated by ICANN immediately.<BR><BR><BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></span></body></html>