[council] Draft GNSO Council Resolution

Tue Apr 18 23:19:44 UTC 2017

Rubens

Unless I’m mistaken we don’t have an updated motion to second at this juncture, but have instead some notes on the existing motion.

So I suppose at this point we as council could be considering the note and suggested edits?

As James pointed out, a councillor would need to propose the amendments to the existing motion.

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/<http://www.blacknight.host/>
http://blacknight.blog/
http://ceo.hosting/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,
Ireland  Company No.: 370845

From: <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br>
Date: Tuesday 18 April 2017 at 16:06
To: James Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Resolution

James,

Does this motion has a second ?

On limited x finite, from a mathematical standpoint, the whole DNS namespace is finite, so a finite list could encompass all possible labels. As you pointed out, this would greatly expand the scope.

Rubens

On Apr 18, 2017, at 6:55 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel at godaddy.com>> wrote:

Councilors –

Please see below and attached for a message from Stephane Hankins of the ICRC, in which he provides some comments/feedback on our motion on amending the PDP regarding RC names.

A few notes:

•         There is no mechanism for a non-Councilor to propose edits to a pending motion that is under consideration by the Council.  Therefore, Mr. Hankins’ proposed changes would need to be raised via a Councilor, if we are to consider them at all.

•         I have reviewed Mr. Hankins’ comments on the language of the motion , and most appear to be cosmetic in nature, with the exception of his edits to Resolved 1(a). Because I believe this change could be read as expanding the scope of protected strings, and as the maker of the motion, I would not accept this change as “friendly”, should it be tabled by a Councilor.

•         Finally, please note Mr. Hankins’ additional request regarding protections for Red Cross acronyms.  Because this topic was not included in our discussions at Copenhagen, I do not recommend we try to address it as a component of this motion.  Rather, I would like to raise it as a point of discussion during our meeting, including possible next steps (e.g., referral to the active PDP).

Thank you,

J.
------------------
James Bladel
GNSO Chair

From: Stephane Hankins <shankins at icrc.org<mailto:shankins at icrc.org>>
Date: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 2:27
To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel at godaddy.com>>
Cc: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au<mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>>, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>>, "Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>" <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>>, "mark.carvell at culture.gov.uk<mailto:mark.carvell at culture.gov.uk>" <mark.carvell at culture.gov.uk<mailto:mark.carvell at culture.gov.uk>>, "Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch>" <Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch>>, Charlotte Lindsey Curtet <clindsey at icrc.org<mailto:clindsey at icrc.org>>
Subject: Draft GNSO Council Resolution

Dear James and GNSO Council members,

We have been copied on the draft GNSO Council Resolution on the initiation of a policy amendment process on specific Red Cross names, to be considered by the GNSO Council on 20 April.

We would like to propose that several minor revisions be brought to the draft Resolution, and in particular that the title of the Resolution refer to the protection of the Red Cross and Red Crescent names and identifiers. Other minor suggestions are included in the attachment to this message.

We also had a question to you whether the resumed PDP should not be proposed to address the question of the ICRC and Federation acronyms/initials. While this was not discussed during the Working Group discussion in Copenhagen, the 2013 PDP and the subsequent GNSO Recommendations to the Board included a recommendation that the ICRC and IFRC acronyms be placed under the 90-days Trademark Clearinghouse Claims Notice protection. The GAC's Durban Communiqué of July 2013 recommended on its part that the acronyms be accorded  [t]he same complementary cost neutral mechanisms to be worked out for the protection of acronyms of IGOs. This is hence another area where the GNSO’s 2013 consensus recommendations are not consistent with GAC advice. Is the assumption that this issue will be referred to the ongoing PDP on curative protections for IGO's? If not, should this question not be referenced in the operative paragraphs of the draft GNSO Council Resolution as an additional issue for review by the resumed PDP. We would appreciate your thoughts on this.

We remain available to take part and to support the resumed PDP process to be decided.

With thanks and kind regards,

Stéphane

Stéphane J. Hankins
Legal adviser
Cooperation and coordination within the Movement
International Committee of the Red Cross
Tel (direct line): ++0041 22 730 24 19
  =============================================================================== The ICRC - working to protect and assist people affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Find out more: www.icrc.org<http://www.icrc.org/> This e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient (s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the consent of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). If you are not an intended recipient please delete this e-mail and notify the sender. ===============================================================================
<Draft Section 16 Resolution for RC names - updated 10 APR 2017.icrc slight revisions (1).docx>_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20170418/641c5e22/attachment.html>