[gnso-rapimpl-dt] GNSO Council resolutions 3 February 2011

[Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

FYI

Ahead of the official Council minutes, please find the motion that was passed 
during the Council meeting on 3 February 2011.

Motion in response to the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group (RAP WG) 
final report.


Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group submitted its report to 
the GNSO Council on 29 May 2010 (see 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf),

and<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf),%E2%80%A8and>

Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed the report and its recommendations and 
decided to form an implementation drafting team to draft a proposed
 approach 
with regard to the recommendations contained in the Registration Abuse Policies 
Working Group Final Report, and

Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Implementation Drafting Team submitted 
its proposed response to the GNSO Council on 15 November 2010
(see 
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf),

and

Whereas the GNSO Council considered the proposed approached at its Working 
Session at the ICANN meeting in Cartagena.

RESOLVED #1, the GNSO Council instructs ICANN Policy Staff to forward the two 
issues identified by the RAP IDT as having low resource 
requirements, WHOIS 
Access recommendation #2 and Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1, to ICANN 
Compliance Staff for resolution. ICANN
 Compliance Staff is requested to 
provide the GNSO Council with its feedback on the two recommendations and 
proposed implementation in a timely manner.

RESOLVED #2, the GNSO Council requests an Issues Report on the current state of 
the UDRP. This effort should consider:

 *   How the UDRP has addressed the problem of cybersquatting to date, and any 
insufficiencies/inequalities associated with the process.

 *   Whether the definition of cybersquatting inherent within the existing UDRP 
language needs to be reviewed or updated.
 The Issue Report should include 
suggestions for how a possible PDP on this issue might be managed.

RESOLVED #3, the GNSO Council requests a discussion paper on the creation of 
non-binding best practices to help registrars and registries address the 
abusive registrations of domain names in accordance with the Registration Abuse 
Policies Working Group Final Report.

This effort should consider (but not be limited the following subjects:

 *   Practices for identifying stolen credentials
 *   Practices for identifying and investigating common forms of malicious use 
(such as malware and phishing)
 *   Creating anti-abuse terms of service for possible inclusion in 
Registrar-Registrant agreements by registrars who adopt them, and for use by 
TLD operators who adopt them.
 *   Identifying compromised/hacked domains versus domain registered by abusers
 *   Practices for suspending domain names
 *   Account access security management
 *   Security resources of use or interest to registrars and registries
 *   Survey registrars and registries to determine practices being used, and 
their adoption rates.

RESOLVED #4 (As proposed by Zahid Jamil): Resolved, the GNSO Council instructs 
ICANN Policy Staff to add the remaining RAP Recommendations to the GNSO Project 
List so that the GNSO Council can keep track of the remaining recommendations 
and address these as appropriate. These remaining RAP Recommendations are:

•         WHOIS Access – Recommendation #1: The GNSO should determine what 
additional research and processes may be needed to ensure that WHOIS data is 
accessible in an appropriately reliable, enforceable, and consistent fashion.
The GNSO Council should consider how such might be related to other WHOIS 
efforts, such as the upcoming review of WHOIS policy and implementation 
required by ICANN’s new Affirmation of Commitments.
•         Uniformity of Contracts:
View A: The RAPWG recommends the creation of an Issues Report to evaluate 
whether a minimum baseline of registration abuse provisions should be created 
for all in-scope ICANN agreements, and if created, how such language would be 
structured to address the most common forms of registration abuse.
View B: Opposed to the recommendation for an Issues Report as expressed in view 
A
•         Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names – Recommendation 
#1:
Rough Consensus: Make no recommendation. The majority of RAPWG members 
expressed that gripe site and offensive domain names that use trademarks should 
be addressed in the context of cybersquatting and the UDRP for purposes of 
establishing consistent registration abuse policies in this area, and that 
creating special procedures for special classes of domains, such as offensive 
domain names, may present problems.
Alternate view: The URDP should be revisited to determine what substantive 
policy changes, if any, would be necessary to address any inconsistencies 
relating to decisions on “gripe” names and to provide for fast track 
substantive and procedural mechanisms in the event of the registration of 
deceptive domain names that mislead adults or children to objectionable sites.
•         Cybersquatting – Recommendation #2:
View A: The RAPWG recommends the initiation of a Policy Development Process by 
requesting an Issues Report to investigate the appropriateness and 
effectiveness of how any Rights Protection Mechanisms that are developed 
elsewhere in the community (e.g. the New gTLD program) can be applied to the 
problem of cybersquatting in the current gTLD space.
View B: The initiation of such a process is premature; the effectiveness and 
consequences of the Rights Protection Mechanisms proposed for the new TLDs is 
unknown. Discussion of RPMs should continue via the New TLD program.  
Experience with them should be gained before considering their appropriate 
relation (if any) to the existing TLD space.
•         Fake Renewal Notices – Recommendation #2 – conditional on #1: The 
following recommendation is conditional. The WG would like to learn the ICANN 
Compliance Department’s opinions regarding Recommendation #1 above, and the WG 
will further discuss Recommendation 2 looking forward to the WG’s Final Report.
The RAPWG recommends the initiation of a Policy Development Process by 
requesting an Issues Report to investigate fake renewal notices.
•         Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices: The RAPWG 
recommends that the GNSO, and the larger ICANN community in general, create and 
support structured, funded mechanisms for the collection and maintenance of 
best practices.
•         Cross-TLD Registration Scam: The RAPWG recommends the GNSO monitor 
for Cross-TLD registration scam abuse in the gTLD space and co-ordinate 
research with the community to determine the nature and extent of the problem. 
The WG believes this issue warrants review but notes there is not enough data 
at this time to warrant an Issues Report or PDP.
•         Meta Issue - Uniformity of Reporting: The RAPWG recommends that the 
GNSO, and the larger ICANN community in general, create and support uniform 
reporting processes.
•         Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names – Recommendation 
#2:
View A: Turn down a proposed recommendation that registries develop best 
practices to restrict the registration of offensive strings.
View B: Registries should consider developing internal best practice policies 
that would restrict the registration of offensive strings in order to mitigate 
the potential harm to consumers and children.
•         Domain Kiting / Tasting: It is unclear to what extent domain kiting 
happens, and the RAPWG does not recommend policy development at this time. The 
RAPWG suggests that the Council monitor the issue (in conjunction with ongoing 
reviews of domain-tasting), and consider next steps if conditions warrant.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you.
Kind regards.

Glen


Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://gnso.icann.org