[council] Next Steps: IAG Report, and WHOIS Conflicts with local law

[Marika Konings]

Stephanie, please see scenario and consequences #2:

 

The Council should specify why it is of the view that the proposed modification is not consistent. Furthermore the Council could consider whether more work is required on the proposed modification to ensure that it is consistent with the intent of the policy recommendations (for example by reconstituting the IAG or forming a new group) or whether the original policy recommendations are in need of review.

 

‘Whether the original policy recommendations are in need of review’ would imply a PDP. 

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

Marika Konings

Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 

Email: marika.konings at icann.org  

 

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO

Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.

 

 

From: <owner-council at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
Date: Friday 7 October 2016 at 10:34
To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com>, GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] Next Steps: IAG Report, and WHOIS Conflicts with local law

 

Thanks for this.  I see no mention of my motion, which basically confirmed my position (and that of NCSG, whose submission missed the deadline) that the policy was fundamentally flawed.  I recognize noone wants another PDP but Council could also take the position that the policy needs to be revisited, and request a charter.  Seems logical if it has never been used in a decade.  Anyway, I would submit that such a document should mention the fact that there were minority views in the IAG that the policy itself has flaws which demand a fix.

Stephanie Perrin

 

On 2016-10-07 12:19, James M. Bladel wrote:

Councilors –

 

Having now considered --and withdrawn-- two separate motions on this topic, it is clear that we need to regroup, reassess, and consider our path(s) forward.  

 

Per the discussion on our 30 SEP call, I would like to convene a group of interested Councilors to kick off discussions and present options. For context, please see the attached Overview document prepared by Staff.  This summary is intended to provide backgrounds, and kick start ideas for resolution, but by no means is it meant to serve as an exhaustive list.

 

I’m hopeful this group can work together to reconcile the diverse opinions on this issue, and come back to Council one or more motions that have sufficient support to pass.

 

Thank you,

 

J.

 

 

 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20161007/ce837659/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4619 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20161007/ce837659/smime.p7s>