[council] Proposed Motion concerning Council communication to ICANN BoD regarding lack of Whois consensus

[Ross Rader]

In the event that there is not a majority vote of Council in favor of 
the resolution put forward by Avri pursuant to the requirements of the 
policy development process and therefore resulting in no policy 
recommendation to the ICANN Board, I would like to table the following 
resolution. Should Avri's motion pass with the majority support of 
Council, I will withdraw this motion at the appropriate time and it will 
not require the consideration of the Council.

In other words, this is a conditional motion that will require a second, 
but may be withdrawn if it is established that there is actually some 
level of agreement concerning the recommendations of the Task Force.

I would also note that the effect of this motion will be to require 
council to make a communication to the board of directors on the subject 
matter at hand. Communications from the Council to the Board are 
considered advisory and non-binding in nature, but may be considered as 
guidance concerning specific matters such as this.

Text of Motion:
---

Whereas;

(i) The GNSO Council has considered the reports of the Whois Working 
Group and Whois Task Force, and;
(ii) That the GNSO Council vote on resolution [XXXXX] failed to produce 
supermajority or majority support for the recommendations of the report 
of the Task Force, and;
(iii) The GNSO Council considers that the results of this vote signifies 
the continued lack of consensus on the key issues and possible solutions 
to those issues, both within the Council, the GNSO and between key 
stakeholder groups, and;
(iv) The GNSO Council recognizes that there is no standing consensus 
policy concerning the management of the Whois service and data provided 
to the public through that service by ICANN's contracted commercial 
operators, the registries and registrars. save and except the Whois Data 
Reminder Policy and the Whois Marketing Restriction Policy, and;
(v) That significant policy must have the support of the Internet and 
DNS community and without that support, those policies cannot be 
reasonably implemented or enforced.

Therefore be it resolved;

(i) That, with regret, the GNSO Council advises the ICANN staff and 
Board of Directors of the lack of general consensus on the key issues 
and solutions pertaining to gTLD Whois, and;
(ii) That due to this lack of consensus the GNSO Council recommends that 
the Board consider "sunsetting" the existing current contractual 
requirements concerning Whois for registries, registrars and registrants 
that are not supported by consensus policy by removing these unsupported 
provisions from the current operating agreements between ICANN and its 
contracted parties, and;
(iii) That these provisions be sunset  no later than the end of the 2008 
ICANN Annual General Meeting and;
(iv) That such provisions will remain sunset until such time that 
consensus policy in this area has been developed to replace the sunset 
provisions, at which point they will be eliminated or modified.

-- 
Regards,

Ross Rader
Director, Retail Services
Tucows Inc.

http://www.domaindirect.com
t. 416.538.5492