3,197
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 61:
Line 61: + Line 69:
Line 70: − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
The working group issued a draft final report in October 2007,<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-15oct07.pdf GNSO Improvements Draft Report], October 15, 2007</ref> and held a workshop on the draft report at [[ICANN 30]] in Los Angeles.<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/losangeles2007/node/44.html ICANN 30 Workshop - GNSO Improvements], October 29, 2007</ref> The draft report refined recommendations related to the broad topics of adopting a working group model, reforming the policy development process, improvements in process for the GNSO Council, and altering the structure of constituencies and participation within constituencies. Staff and cross-community interaction and outreach were also adressed. The workshop was well-attended and drew a number of comments on the recommendations being proposed, as well as the overall process of the working group.<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-la-workshop-29oct07.pdf Summary of BGC Working Group Workshop on GNSO Improvements], October 29, 2017</ref> There was also a public comment period for the draft report, with eight comments submitted.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gnso-improvements-2007-10-19-en GNSO Improvements - Public Comment Proceeding], October 19, 2007</ref>
The working group issued a draft final report in October 2007,<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-15oct07.pdf GNSO Improvements Draft Report], October 15, 2007</ref> and held a workshop on the draft report at [[ICANN 30]] in Los Angeles.<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/losangeles2007/node/44.html ICANN 30 Workshop - GNSO Improvements], October 29, 2007</ref> The draft report refined recommendations related to the broad topics of adopting a working group model, reforming the policy development process, improvements in process for the GNSO Council, and altering the structure of constituencies and participation within constituencies. Staff and cross-community interaction and outreach were also adressed. The workshop was well-attended and drew a number of comments on the recommendations being proposed, as well as the overall process of the working group.<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-la-workshop-29oct07.pdf Summary of BGC Working Group Workshop on GNSO Improvements], October 29, 2017</ref> There was also a public comment period for the draft report, with eight comments submitted.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gnso-improvements-2007-10-19-en GNSO Improvements - Public Comment Proceeding], October 19, 2007</ref>
==Final Report==
The working group's final report was submitted to the board in February 2008.<ref name="dashboard" /> The report concludes:
The working group's final report was submitted to the board in February 2008.<ref name="dashboard" /> The report concludes:
<blockquote>Our deliberations have achieved near consensus on a comprehensive set of recommendations that addresses five main areas:
<blockquote>Our deliberations have achieved near consensus on a comprehensive set of recommendations that addresses five main areas:
* Improving GNSO coordination with other ICANN bodies.<ref name="finalrep">[https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03feb08.pdf Final Report of the BGC Working Group on GNSO Improvements], February 3, 2008</ref></blockquote>
* Improving GNSO coordination with other ICANN bodies.<ref name="finalrep">[https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03feb08.pdf Final Report of the BGC Working Group on GNSO Improvements], February 3, 2008</ref></blockquote>
The report contained a total of nineteen action items within these five categories.<ref name="finalrep" /> As the working group was a component of the board process, the action items were mainly directives to the GNSO Council or delegations of tasks to ICANN staff. Some of the directives involved an eventual return to the board for action - for example, amendments to the [[ICANN Bylaws]].
The report contained a total of nineteen action items within these five categories.<ref name="finalrep" /> As the working group was a committee of the board, the action items were mainly board directives to the GNSO Council or delegations of tasks to ICANN staff. Some of the directives involved an eventual return to the board for action - for example, amendments to the [[ICANN Bylaws]].
On February 15, 2008, the board accepted the report and approved its recommendations, subject to a final public comment period.<ref name="impres">[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2008-02-15-en#_Toc64545918 Resolutions the Board], February 15, 2008</ref> During the passing of the public comment period, the board directed ICANN staff to "draft a detailed implementation plan in consultation with the GNSO, begin implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, and return to the Board and community for further consideration of the implementation plan."<ref name="impres" />
On February 15, 2008, the board accepted the report and approved its recommendations, subject to a final public comment period.<ref name="impres">[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2008-02-15-en#_Toc64545918 Resolutions the Board], February 15, 2008</ref> During the passing of the public comment period, the board directed ICANN staff to "draft a detailed implementation plan in consultation with the GNSO, begin implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, and return to the Board and community for further consideration of the implementation plan."<ref name="impres" />
The public comment period on the final report received thirty-one comments. The summary report of public comments characterized ten of those comments as not germane to the specific topics contained in the final report, and noted that four of them merely requested an extension of time for the public comment period.<ref>[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00033.html ICANN Listserv Archive - Public Comment Proceeding Summary email from Robert Hoggarth], May 6, 2008</ref> There were extensive comments on the recommendations. A collective of user constituencies (ALAC, the Commercial and Business Users Constituency, the Intellectual Property Constituency, the Internet Service and Connection Providers Constituency, and the Non-Commercial Users Constituency) presented a joint proposal for restructuring the council.<ref>[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00012.html ICANN.org Listserv Archive - email from Philip Sheppard re: joint users proposal], April 23, 2008</ref> From the summary report:
<blockquote>The finalized UC [joint proposal] contribution expresses support for the effort to create a better representational balance on the GNSO Council, but the UC says the BGC WG’s recommendations have three defects that 'contradict the goals of improving policy development and maximizing stakeholder participation.' The UC says the defects include (1) over-representation of contract parties; (2) insufficient stakeholder participation; and (3) external credibility issues.<ref name="finalpc">[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/docSBOmLSrq2b.doc Summary Report of Public Comments on GNSO Improvements], May 7, 2008 (Word document)</ref> The joint proposal offered this alternative to Council composition:
* create a "a parity triangle of equal representation to represent all stakeholders." - 6 seats each for contractual interests (registries and registrars), commercial interests, and non-commercial interests;
* consider using NomCom appointments to the GNSO Council to provide specific expertise to working groups; and
* regardless of decisions about the specific number of seats, the Council totals should create equal, unweighted votes for the three interest groups described above.<ref name="userjp">[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/doc0zD0kzbGO4.doc Joint Proposal from the User Community for GNSO Council Structural Change], April 23, 2008 (Word document)</ref>
The joint proposal generated discussion among commenters as the public comment period progressed. In their comments, the ALAC, the Noncommercial User's Group, and the Internet Commerce Association expressed support for the joint proposal, as well as making other comments about the final report. Two individuals - [[Chuck Gomes]] and [[Jeff Neuman]], specifically objected to the joint proposal.<ref name="finalpc" /> The majority of other comments expressed support for most of the recommendations, although some constituencies objected to specific action items, or warned against utilizing structural changes to "fix" human behaviors.<ref name="finalpc" />
==Implementation==
==Implementation==
===Implementation Planning===
GNSO activity regarding implementation was ongoing in parallel with the board review of the GNSO Improvements working group recommendations. The GNSO1 dashboard reports that the GNSO Improvement Planning Team (IPT) was formed on March 1, 2008<ref name="dashboard" />, although the dashboard refers to a board resolution from [[ICANN 37]] in Nairobi from March 12 that makes no reference to the GNSO review. <ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2010-03-12-en#1.6 Resolution of the Board], March 12, 2010</ref> The GNSO's community reference on GNSO1 states that the GNSO Council created the IPT.<ref name="background" /> The IPT circulated a draft of a "Top Level Plan" in May 2008 to the GNSO Council and community for feedback.<ref name="tlp1">[https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gnso-improvements-top-level-plan-22may08.pdf GNSO Improvements Top-Level Plan], May 22, 2008</ref> After review and feedback, a second draft was published in June.<ref name="tlp2">[https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gnso-improvements-top-level-plan-21jun08.pdf GNSO Improvements Top-Level Plan], June 21, 2008</ref> The revised plan proposed two standing committees for improvements work - a process committee and an operations committee - and proposed charters for each committee.<ref name="tlp2" />
===Board Actions===
On March 28, at [[ICANN 32]] in Paris, the board acknowledged the work of the IPT, as well as receipt of the final GNSO Improvements report.<ref name="paris">[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2008-06-26-en#_Toc76113182 Resolution of the Board], June 26, 2008</ref> It endorsed all the recommendations in the final report, with the exception of the recommendation regarding Council restructuing. On that topic, it instructed the GNSO Council to convene a working group, including at least one member from each constituency, one member from among the NomCom appointees to the Council, and one member from each of the Council liaison-appointing ACs who wished to appoint a member.<ref name="paris" /> The group was instructed to develop and present a Council restructuring recommendation "by no later than 25 July 2008 for consideration by the ICANN Board as soon as possible, but no later than the Board meeting in August 2008."<ref name="paris" />
The working group on GNSO Council restructuring presented its final report on July 25.<ref name="wggcr">[https://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/doc5J7pHLFhmI.doc Report to the ICANN Board from WG-GCR], July 25, 2008 (Word document)</ref> The report was also distributed to the GNSO Council.<ref>[https://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg05245.html GNSO Council Listserv - Rob Hoggarth to list], July 28, 2008</ref> The report recommended a "two houses" GNSO structure, with the Council divided into a contracted party house, and a non-contracted party house.
==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}