icannwiki

Governmental Advisory Committee: Difference between revisions

← Older edit
VisualWikitext
 
(54 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Glossary|
The '''Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)''' is a formal advisory body providing important advice regarding the public policy implications of [[ICANN]].<ref>[http://gac.icann.org/about-gac/ GAC Definition]</ref> It held its inaugural meeting in March 2, 1999, counting then with 24 member governments and 7 observer organizations<ref>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/timeline-icann-in-history-28sep23-en.pdf</ref>.
|note  = This article is neutral, but is [[Sponsorship|sponsored]] by<br> [[.pw The Professional Web]], a new TLD<br/>for professionals and businesses.<br> You can learn more about their services [http://www.registry.pw/ here]
| logo            = PW-LOGO-1.png
|link          = http://icannwiki.com/index.php/The_Professional_Web
| silversponsor = ICANNWiki [[Sponsorship|Silver Sponsor]]
}}


'''GAC''' is the acronym for the '''Governmental Advisory Committee''', which is a formal advisory body providing important feedback and input for [[ICANN]] regarding its public policy.<ref>[http://gac.icann.org/about-gac/ GAC Definition]</ref>
==Overview==
[[ICANN]] relies on certain [[Advisory Committee|advisory committees]] to receive guidance and advice related to the interests and needs of stakeholders who are not able to directly participate in the [[Supporting Organizations]]. One of these advisory committees is the Governmental Advisory Committee, which is composed of representatives of national governments from all over the world.


==Overview==
The GAC is an advisory committee to ICANN, created under the ICANN ByLaws. It provides advice to ICANN on public policy aspects of ICANN’s responsibilities with regard to the Internet [[Domain Name System]] (DNS). One of its most important responsibilities is analyzing ICANN's activities and policies as they might influence governments, especially with regard to the interaction between [[ICANN]]'s policies and national laws or international agreements.<ref>[http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/ICANN_Governmental_Advisory_Committee GAC considerations], Wikia.com.</ref>
[[ICANN]] relies on certain advisory committees to receive guidance and advice related to the interests and needs of stakeholders who are not able to directly participate in the Supporting Organizations. One of these advisory committees is the Governmental Advisory Committee, which is composed of representatives of national governments from all over the world.  
 
The GAC is not a decision-making body. It advises ICANN on issues that are within ICANN’s scope. GAC advice has a particular status under the ICANN ByLaws. Its advice must be duly taken into account by the [[ICANN Board]], and where the Board proposes actions inconsistent with GAC advice it must give reasons for doing so and attempt to reach a mutually acceptable solution. The GAC appoints a non-voting liaison to the ICANN Board. This is normally the GAC Chair.  


The GAC provides its advice and guidance upon request. One of its most important responsibilities is analyzing ICANN's activities and policies as they might influence governments, especially with regards to the interaction between [[ICANN]]'s policies and national laws or international agreements.<ref>[http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/ICANN_Governmental_Advisory_Committee GAC considerations], Wikia.com.</ref>
However, the GAC is a [[ICANN Empowered Community]] Decisional Participant. This means the GAC has formal obligations under the Bylaws to receive and initiate petitions, participate in community discussions, and support, reject or abstain from a collective exercise of one of the EC powers. The community communicates its decisions through the EC
Administration, which is comprised of chairs or representatives of Decisional Participants from each SO/AC.<ref>[https://75.schedule.icann.org/meetings/HuBAngrxBhqYBshym GAC Capacity Building and Outreach Workshop 1: What is the GAC and How Does It Work?, ICANN 75]</ref>  


The GAC has the duty to incorporate the diverse opinions and perspective of its members when supplying advice to [[ICANN]], and it's imperative that its members stay informed about new Internet trends and pending policy issues. The organization is constantly looking for new members, especially those from developing countries, in order to increase global awareness, increase participation, and make sure that ICANN reflects global diversity.
The GAC has the duty to incorporate the diverse opinions and perspectives of its members when supplying advice to [[ICANN]], and it's imperative that its members stay informed about new Internet trends and pending policy issues.  


===GAC Structure===
===GAC Structure===
The GAC has more than 100 members, and three of its important organizational features are:
As of 2022, the GAC has 180 government members and 38 observers, which participate equally in all discussions.<ref>[https://75.schedule.icann.org/meetings/HuBAngrxBhqYBshym GAC Capacity Building and Outreach Workshop 1: What is the GAC and How Does It Work?, ICANN 75]</ref> Three of its important organizational features are:<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/About+The+GAC About GAC]. Retrieved 27 Nov 2017.</ref>
* A structure consisting of elected officers, a Chairman and 3 Vice-chair which include:
* A structure consisting of elected officers, which currently includes:
** [[Heather Dryden]], Canada (Chairman)
** GAC Chair: [[Nicolas Caballero]] (Paraguay);
** [[Alice Munyua]], Kenya (Vice-chair)
** GAC Vice Chairs: [[Christine Arida]] (Egypt) and [[Thiago Dal-Toe]] (Colombia); and
** [[Maria Häll]], Sweden (Vice-chair)
** [[Zeina Bou Harb]] (Lebanon), [[Nigel Hickson]] (United Kingdom), and [[Wang Lang]] (China).<ref>[https://meetings.icann.org/sites/default/files/icann76-policy-outcome-report-10apr23-en.pdf ICANN76 Policy Outcomes Report, pg23</ref>
** [[Choon-Sai Lim]], Singapore (Vice-chair)
* Its organization has at least three meetings on a yearly basis which are held in conjunction with ICANN's meetings.
* Its GAC Secretariat
* Its organization at least three meetings on a yearly basis which are held in conjunction with ICANN's meetings.


==GAC Policy Advice Development Process==
===Working Groups===
The GAC creates different Working Groups to study and address each issue; for instance, there was a different working group for [[IDN]]s than the one for [[ccTLD]]s.<ref>[http://www.aptld.org/dubaiJune2007/04%20JK%20-%20APTLD%20meeting%20June%202007.pdf GAC working groups], apTLD.org. Published June 2007.</ref>
The GAC creates different Working Groups to study and address each issue; for instance, there was a different working group for [[IDN]]s than the one for [[ccTLD]]s.<ref>[http://www.aptld.org/dubaiJune2007/04%20JK%20-%20APTLD%20meeting%20June%202007.pdf GAC working groups], apTLD.org. Published June 2007.</ref>
 
#Any GAC member or observer may raise an issue for discussion or the ICANN Board can seek advice from the GAC.
===Related Bodies===
#In response, the GAC chair solicits input from GAC members, observers, and [[Working Group]]s.
Other such advisory committees which are important for ICANN are:
#The GAC chair summarizes comments gathered during the [[Public Comment]] period to reach a consensus.
* [[ALAC]] (At-Large Advisory Committee)
#GAC members, observers, and working groups draft advice, which the GAC then reviews.
* [[Root Server System Advisory Committee]]
#If consensus is reached, then the GAC chair issues a communiqué, correspondence, or itemized list of advice to the [[ICANN Board]].<ref>[https://gac.icann.org/advice/itemized/ GAC Advice]</ref>
* [[SSAC]] (Security and Stability Advisory Committee)
Working Groups can be created by the GAC Chair (GAC Operating Principle 27) and they:
* [[TLG]] (Technical Liaison Group)
* focus on particular topics or areas related to substantive or administrative issues;
* have their own agreed Terms of Reference;
* are comprised of volunteer GAC members and observers;
* may have a dedicated mailing list, in-person meetings, and conference calls;
* rely on briefs for meetings and provide reports for GAC plenaries;
* can be ongoing or have a limited lifespan; and
* provide expertise, recommendations, or draft documentation to be considered by GAC Leadership or the full GAC.<ref>[https://75.schedule.icann.org/meetings/HuBAngrxBhqYBshym GAC Capacity Building and Outreach Workshop 1: What is the GAC and How Does It Work?, ICANN 75]</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Group Name
! Outputs
! Status
! Start Date
|-
| [[ICANN Board]]-GAC Interaction Group (BGIG)
|
| Active
| style="text-align:right;" | 27 Mar 2014
|-
| GAC Operating Principles Evolution Working Group (GOPEWG)
| [https://gac.icann.org/work-plans/GOPE-WG-Work-Plan-2022-2023.pdf 22/23 Work Plans] <br/> [https://gac.icann.org/principles-and-guidelines/gac-working-group-guidelines.pdf WG Principles & Guidelines]
| Active
| style="text-align:right;" | 24 Oct 2018
|-
| Human Rights and International Law (HRILWG)
| [https://gac.icann.org/activity/gac-involvement-in-work-stream-2-recommendations-implementation Work Stream 2 Recommendations Implementation]
| Active
| style="text-align:right;" | 8 Feb 2015
|-
| [[Universal Acceptance]] and [[IDN|Internationalized Domain Names]] Working Group (UA-IDN WG)
|
| Active
| style="text-align:right;" | 3 Nov 2019
|-
| GAC Working Group on Under-Served Regions (USRWG)
| [https://gac.icann.org/activity/gac-capacity-development-workshop-2017-2018 GAC Capacity Development Workshop] <br/>[https://gac.icann.org/activity/gac-faq-on-delegation-and-redelegations GAC FAQ on Delegation and Redelegations]
| Active
|
|-
| Public Safety Working Group (PSWG)
| [https://gac.icann.org/working-group/gac-public-safety-working-group-pswg#wg-sow Developing [[DNS Abuse]] and [[Cybercrime]] mitigation capabilities of the ICANN and Law Enforcement communities]<br />Preserving and improve domain [[Whois|registration directory services]] effectiveness<br />Building effective and resilient PSWG operations<br />Developing participation and in PSWG work and ensure stakeholder input
| Active
|
|-
| [[Sub Pro|Subsequent Rounds of New gTLDs]]
| [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SgXD9zBt9-Pi5YJbICDmj_FZZzVgrROupBdI0Pw1Ay4/edit GAC Scorecard on New gTLD Subsequent Rounds - FINAL REPORT 2020]
| Closed
|
|-
| [[GeoTLD|Geographic Names in Expansion of gTLDs]]
|
| Closed
| style="text-align:right;" | 9 Aug 2013
|-
| GAC's Participation in [[NomCom]]
|
| Closed
|
|}


==GAC Achievements, Comments, and Advice==
==GAC Achievements, Comments, and Advice==
Over the years, GAC is proud of accomplishing the following:
GAC Accomplishments:
* Setting up the principles for [[ccTLD]] management and delegation;
* The 2007 new principles for generic top-level domains (gTLDs)
* Setting up the principles for public policy for delegation, introduction, and [[gTLD]] operation;
* New gTLDs scorecard, which was important to the new gTLDs program and widely hailed as a major success and model for the future
* Setting up the principles for public policy of [[gTLD]] [[Whois]] services;<ref>[http://www.aptld.org/dubaiJune2007/04%20JK%20-%20APTLD%20meeting%20June%202007.pdf GAC accomplishments], apTLD.org. Published 2007 June.</ref>
* ICANN’s acceptance of safeguards for new gTLDs to reflect law enforcement and consumer protection concerns.
* WHOIS principles, including bringing law enforcement to the ICANN table to address cybercrime
* Maintaining security and stability of the DNS 
* Delegation and administration of country code domains (ccTLDs)
* Structural and process outcomes, including
* Greater accountability and transparency of all areas of ICANN (including the GAC itself)
* Liaison with the ICANN Board, through the GAC Chair’s membership and a formal register of GAC advice and actions taken
* Cross-community activities between GAC and ICANN policy-making bodies such as those dealing with generic and country-specific top-level domain names.
* Operation of a travel support program to assist developing countries to participate in GAC meetings.


The GAC has been influential with regards to [[IDN]]s as well as best practices for [[IPv4]] and [[IPv6]], and is an integral part of all ICANN decisions.
The GAC has been influential with regards to [[IDN]]s as well as best practices for [[IPv4]] and [[IPv6]], and is an integral part of all ICANN decisions.


===ATRT Final Report on GAC's Role & Interaction with the ICANN Board===
===New gTLDs===
The [[ATRT|Accountability and Transparency Review Team]] (ATRT) was one of the four Review Teams created by ICANN to comply with the requirements set forth by the U.S. [[DOC|Department of Commerce]] (DOC) in the '''Affirmation of Commitments.''' The primary objective of the ATRT is to evaluate ICANN's ability to perform its duties with accountability and transparency.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review Affirmation of Commitments – Reviews], ICANN.org.</ref> ATRT is composed of volunteer members; 1 from both the [[ASO]] and [[ALAC]], 2 from the [[ccNSO]], 4 from the [[GNSO]], 4 from governments including 2 ex-officio members, the chair of the ICANN Board and 1 or 2 independent experts.  The GAC's representatives to the [[ATRT]] include [[Manal Ismail]], an ex-officio member who is the designated nominee of former GAC chairman [[Janis Karklins]] and vice-chair of RT, [[Fabio Colossanti]] from the EU and [[Xinsheng Zhang]] from China.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/composition Accountability and Transparency Review Team Composition], ICANN.org.</ref>
 
On December 31, 2010, the ATRT submitted its Final Report to the [[ICANN Board]] with 27 recommendations. The final report identified four areas to improve ICANN's accountability and transparency:<ref name="finalrecs">[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2010/12/31/atrt-final-report#concern Final Recommendations of the Accountability and Transparency Review Team], Dot-Nxt.com. Published 2010 December 31.</ref>
* Board governance, performance, and composition
* The GAC's role, effectiveness and Interaction with the Board
* Public input and policy development processes
* Review mechanisms for Board decisions
 
Regarding the GAC's role, effectiveness and interaction with the Board, the ATRT recommended the following:<ref name="finalrecs"></ref>
* The GAC-Board Joint Working Group needs to clarify what constitutes GAC public policy "advice" under the Bylaws by March 2011.
* After establishing the formal context of GAC public policy "advice," the ICANN Board should develop a more formal documented process to notify and request for GAC advice regarding public policy issues by March 2011. The ATRT recommended for ICANN to be proactive in requesting GAC advice in writing. In addition, the team also recommended the development of a database to document every request and all advice received by ICANN from the GAC.
* The Board and GAC should work together to ensure that GAC advice is provided and considered on time.The  ATRT also suggested the creation of an independent review joint working group and a formal documentation process on how ICANN responds to GAC advice by March, 2011. The process must require ICANN to provide specific information in a timely manner regarding its position, whether it agrees or disagrees with GAC advice, and for both parties to find mutually acceptable solutions in good faith. The Board and GAC must also establish strategies to ensure that relevant provisions in the Bylaws are met.
* The Board should develop and implement mechanisms to engage the GAC earlier in the policy development process.
* The Board and GAC should work together to create and implement actions to ensure that GAC is well informed regarding ICANN's policy agenda. Both parties should also consider creating/evaluating the role and necessary skills of the ICANN Support Staff to ensure that effective communication is provided.
* The Board is encouraged to increase the level of support and commitment to the GAC process by: encouraging member countries, particularly developing countries, to participate in GAC deliberations; providing multilingual access to ICANN records; and developing a process to identify how and when ICANN deals with senior government officials on public policy issues on a regular or collective basis to compliment the GAC process.
 
===GAC Advice on the .xxx sTLD===
On March 17, 2011, the GAC, via its Chairman [[Heather Dryden]], reiterated to ICANN Chairman [[Peter Dengate Thrush]] that the Committee has no active support for the implementation of the [[.xxx]] [[sTLD]]. The GAC also informed ICANN that some governments might prevent access to the TLD, which could harm the global interoperability and stability of the internet. Furthermore, the Committee also pointed out the possibility that ICANN may have to assume a management and oversight role regarding .xxx content.<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/03/17/gac-statement-dot-xxx GAC Statement on .xxx]</ref> Despite GAC's position, the [[ICANN Board]] approved the .xxx sTLD during the [[ICANN 41]] Meeting in San Francisco, on March 18, 2011.<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/04/03/summary-icann-san-francisco#xxx Conference summary: ICANN San Francisco]</ref> The disregard for the GAC's advice in this instance provided for a number of other international entities to question ICANN's ability to successfully manage the [[DNS]].
 
==New gTLDs==
At [[ICANN 42]] in Dakar, Senegal, GAC raised concern that if the number of [[new gTLD]] applications published by ICANN exceeded 500, GAC members may have too little time and resources to offer advice on all applications. ICANN had stated previously that it intended to process applications in batches of 500, and in Senegal, GAC urged for clarification on these procedures, citing that different batch processes may have an impact on competition. Furthermore, GAC stressed the importance of promoting gTLD application rounds in all countries, especially developing countries.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/4816912/Communique+Dakar+-+27+October+2011.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1319796551396 GAC Communiqué – Dakar], ICANN.org. Published 27 October 2011. Retrieved 23 November 2013.</ref>
At [[ICANN 42]] in Dakar, Senegal, GAC raised concern that if the number of [[new gTLD]] applications published by ICANN exceeded 500, GAC members may have too little time and resources to offer advice on all applications. ICANN had stated previously that it intended to process applications in batches of 500, and in Senegal, GAC urged for clarification on these procedures, citing that different batch processes may have an impact on competition. Furthermore, GAC stressed the importance of promoting gTLD application rounds in all countries, especially developing countries.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/4816912/Communique+Dakar+-+27+October+2011.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1319796551396 GAC Communiqué – Dakar], ICANN.org. Published 27 October 2011. Retrieved 23 November 2013.</ref>


On January 11, 2012, the ninth version of the [[Applicant Guidebook]] was released one day prior to the opening window of ICANN's [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD program]]. The new version gave greater power to the GAC in forcing the [[ICANN Board]] to manually review any application that the committee found problematic. Exactly how many GAC members it would take to cause this review is vague, but it could be as little as one nation's objection. This is a significant change given that the [[ICANN Board]] had no requirement to heed any GAC objection in the previous guidebook; the board is still able to overrule any GAC objection.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/gac-gets-more-power-to-block-controversial-gtlds/ GAC Gets More Power to Block Controversial gTLDs], DomainIncite.com.</ref>
On January 11, 2012, the ninth version of the [[Applicant Guidebook]] was released one day prior to the opening window of ICANN's [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD program]]. The new version gave greater power to the GAC in forcing the [[ICANN Board]] to manually review any application that the committee found problematic. Exactly how many GAC members it would take to cause this review is vague, but it could be as little as one nation's objection. This is a significant change given that the [[ICANN Board]] had no requirement to heed any GAC objection in the previous guidebook; the board is still able to overrule any GAC objection.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/gac-gets-more-power-to-block-controversial-gtlds/ GAC Gets More Power to Block Controversial gTLDs], DomainIncite.com.</ref>


In January 2013, further accommodations were made to the [[GAC]]'s power for remediation and the applicants' abilities to respond. While official GAC Warnings had yet to arrive, the GAC Early Advice had, and ICANN Chairman, [[Steve Crocker]], signaled that changes to applications to implement GAC recommendations "would in all likelihood be permitted". While firm policy was not immedietley offered, it was a recognition of an issue that arose following [[ICANN 45]] in Toronto, that is, if and how the applicants could change their applications to satisfy the GAC and if those changes would be binding. The latter issue, turning an applicants' proposed procedures into binding contractual agreements, is another concern for the GAC.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11646-gac-early-warnings-just-got-a-whole-lot-more-important/comment-page-1#comment-23421 GAC Early Warnings Just got A Whole Lot More Important, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieve 18 Jan 2013</ref>
In January 2013, there was further clarification regarding the applicants' abilities to respond to GAC advice by submitting change requests to their applications. While official GAC Advice had yet to arrive, the GAC Early Warnings had, and ICANN Chairman, [[Steve Crocker]], signaled that changes to applications to implement GAC recommendations "would in all likelihood be permitted", under the not explicitly defined reasons for acceptable changes contained in the applicant guidebook. While a firm policy was not immediately offered, it was a recognition of an issue that arose following [[ICANN 45]] in Toronto, that is, if and how the applicants could change their applications to satisfy the GAC and if those changes would be binding. The latter issue, turning an applicant's proposed procedures into binding contractual agreements, is another concern for the GAC, which Mr. Crocker noted the board would discuss.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11646-gac-early-warnings-just-got-a-whole-lot-more-important/comment-page-1#comment-23421 GAC Early Warnings Just got A Whole Lot More Important, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieve 18 Jan 2013</ref>


===Early Warnings===
===Early Warnings===
Line 78: Line 122:
* DotConnectAfrica, an applicant for [[.africa]], received 17 Early Warnings whereas [[UniForum SA]] received none for their .africa application
* DotConnectAfrica, an applicant for [[.africa]], received 17 Early Warnings whereas [[UniForum SA]] received none for their .africa application


The body will offer its 'GAC advice' on the applications in April 2013. The warnings are nto definitive, to not represent GAC consensus, and do not mean that any TLD that wasn't warned will not receive GAC Advice.<ref name="earlywarnings"></ref>
The body will offer its 'GAC advice' on the applications in April 2013. The warnings are not definitive, do not represent GAC consensus, and do not mean that any TLD that wasn't warned will not receive GAC Advice.<ref name="earlywarnings"></ref>


==GAC Participation at ICANN==
==PICs & GAC Advice==
===ICANN 43, GAC-GNSO Joint Meeting===
[[PIC|Public Interest Commitments]] (PICs) as related to [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD applicants]] and the [[Registry Agreement]] they are to sign, is a term and creation directly from [[ICANN]], first suggested on February 5th, 2013, in ICANN's revised new registry agreement that it opened for public comments.
In March, 2012, the GAC had a joint meeting with the [[GNSO]] regarding the plan to extend special domain name protections for the Red Cross and the International Olympic Committee, the ongoing amendment negotiations to the [[Registrar Accreditation Agreement]], and the Human Rights Council discussion on the freedom of expression over the internet. The GAC informed the GNSO that it supports the extension of domain name protections for the Red Cross and the Olympics but that it is not a consensus view. The Committee supported the issue on freedom of expression over the internet and acknowledge the progress of the RAA and requested a timelime.<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/icann43/sun/gnso-gac GAC-GNSO Joint Meeting]</ref>


===ICANN 44===
PICs are voluntary amendments that applicants can create, sign, and undertake along with the general registry agreement in order to hold their registry operations to certain standards. They seem to originally have been developed as a way to allow applicants to appease GAC members that may be concerned about how their application stands as is, or how ICANN will be able to ensure a potential registry remains compliant with its aspirations and mandate as it defined in its summary of its proposed operations in the TLD application. As is, prior to PICs, there was no clear way of defining operating procedures when moving from the long-form essays in the TLD application to the Registry Agreement.  
In September, 2012, a working group related to the [[European Commission]] sent a letter to [[ICANN]] warning that its proposed additions to the [[RAA|Registrar Accreditation Agreement]] would infringe on European Privacy laws. The issues in question are the proposals to make registrars retain data about their customers for up to two years after registration, and by the idea that registrars should re-verify contact data every year. These proposals were discussed and supported by the GAC and the law enforcement voices within ICANN at [[ICANN 44]] in Prague. This is potentially conflicting given that the GAC supported these measures and this pan-European body is coming down against it.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10606-european-privacy-watchdog-says-icanns-whois-demands-are-unlawful European Privacy Watchdog Says ICANNs WhoisDemands Are Unlawful, DomainIncite.com]</ref>


===ICANN 45===
For example, if an applicant expresses a desire to restrict registration to a certain group of professionals, such as doctors, lawyers, etc., the applicant can create a PIC to underline this and hold their future registry to that standard. If the applicant did not originally intend to create such restrictions as defined in its TLD application, but it has received communication from the GAC that the supporting organization intends to oppose its application to the [[ICANN Board]] without such language, then the PIC can be added as an appeal to those governments.  
As opposed to holding its general meetings with other supporting organizations and advisory committees within ICANN, the GAC has created more personal meeting time. This was done in an attempt to coordinate all of its GAC Early Warnings related to ICANN's [[New gTLD Program|gTLD expansion program]]. They will hold a meeting with the heads of other advisory bodies rather than the entire groups.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10580-governments-to-focus-on-new-gtlds-during-icanns-new-eight-day-toronto-meeting Governments to Focus on new gTLDs During ICANNs New Eight Day Toronto Meeting, DomainIncite.com]</ref>


At the meeting, the GAC signaled that it would not recommend to the [[ICANN Board]] to extensively reserve Intergovernmental Organizations' names on new gTLDs. There was some concern that the GAC would make recommendations similar to those made by the U.N. and related agencies, which call for protections of any organization on the "6ter" list of Paris maintained by [[WIPO]], and contains 1,100 strings in total. The GAC advice calls for protections of any organization registered on the [[.int]] TLD, a little-used space for IGOs. That TLD only has 166 registrants.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10805-gac-gives-reprieve-to-four-at-risk-new-gtld-bids GAC gives reprieve to four at risk new gTLD bids, DomainIncite.com]</ref>
It is a controversial topic that many applicants think was created quickly, with no outside input, and is presented in such a way that they feel compelled to make a decision without fully understanding the proposal. It seems to apply to a small subset of applicants, as only 145 of 1,409 strings were flagged by GAC Early Warnings, the primary target for PICs.<ref name= "PIC DI">[http://domainincite.com/11795-icanns-new-gtld-public-interest-commitments-idea-genius-or-pure-crazy ICANN's New gTLD Public Interest Commitments, DomainIncite.com] Retrieved 4 Mar 2013</ref> The dispute resolution procedure, the Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Process or PICDRP, has yet to be defined. Applicants were given one month, until March 5th, to submit their PICs. It seemed to conflict with other deadlines, such as the end of objection filing just a week later, so, "potential objectors would have to decide whether to file their objections based on PICs that have been published for just one week and that could be amended post-deadline."<ref name= "PIC DI"></ref><ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/base-agreement-05feb13-en.htm Public Comment, Base Agreement, 5 Feb 13, ICANN.org] Retrieved 4 Mar 2013</ref>
 
ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé noted around the imminent closing of the PIC submission date that this issue has the potential for pushing back the receipt of GAC advice and therefore the entire TLD implementation schedule, which is tightly fixed and aiming to recommend the first TLDs for delegation by April 23rd. ICANN will not recommend TLDs for implementation without the GAC's final advice, and the GAC seems to be placing a great import on the submission of PICs, of which the applicants remain wary.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/12138-pics-could-be-beijing-deal-breaker-for-new-gtlds Application Download, PICS could be Beijing Deal Breaker for New gTLDs DomainIncite.com]Published March 4th, Retrieved March 5th, 2013</ref>
 
===Related Bodies===
Other such advisory committees that are important for ICANN are:
* [[ALAC]] (At-Large Advisory Committee)
* [[Root Server System Advisory Committee]]
* [[SSAC]] (Security and Stability Advisory Committee)
* [[TLG]] (Technical Liaison Group)


==References==
==References==
{{Reflist}}
<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
{{reflist}}</div>
 


[[Category: Glossary]]
[[Category:Committees]]
[[Category: ICANN Bodies]]
Retrieved from "https://icannwiki.org/Governmental_Advisory_Committee"