Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) Advice Status

• ICANN75 Kuala Lumpur Communiqué (26 September 2022)

ICANN48 Buenos Aires Communique

4.a.i.

Protection of Inter-Governmental Organisations (IGOs)

(20 November 2013)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. In addition to reviewing the EPDP recommendations, the Board will also consider the remaining GNSO policy recommendations concerning protections for IGO acronyms, including the four GNSO Council-approved recommendations from the Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms.

ICANN49 Singapore Communique

8.

Protection of Inter­-Governmental Organisation (IGO) Names and Acronyms

(27 March 2014)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN50 London Communique

5.

Protection of Inter-Governmental Organisation (IGO) Names and Acronyms

(25 June 2014)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN51 Los Angeles Communique

5.a.I-II - 5.b.I.

Protection of Inter-Governmental Organisation (IGO) Names and Acronyms

15 October 2014

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN52 Singapore Communique

2.

Protection of Names and Acronyms for Inter-Governmental Organisations (IGOs)

(11 February 2015)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN58 Copenhagen Communique

2.a.III

IGO Protections

(15 March 2017)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN58 Copenhagen Communique

2.a.II

IGO Protections

(15 March 2017)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN58 Copenhagen Communique

2.a.I

IGO Protections

(15 March 2017)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the Board resolution of October 2020, the Board believed that the most appropriate solution (not including any curative rights mechanisms) regarding second level protections for IGO acronyms that is in the best interests of the ICANN community and ICANN will be for the ICANN organization to implement, as an operational matter, an ongoing (i.e. permanent) post-registration notification mechanism that will notify an affected IGO when a third party registers a second level domain matching that organization's acronym. The Board has confirmed that the interim reservations of IGO acronyms will remain in place until the permanent post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

ICANN59 Johannesburg Communique

1.a.I-III

Intergovernmental Organization (IGO) Protections

(29 June 2017)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

Since this advice was issued, GAC members and IGO representatives participated in the EPDP on Specific Curative Rights Protections for IGOs. The EPDP completed its work in April 2022 and the GNSO Council approved the five Full Consensus recommendations in June 2022, which it forwarded to the Board in a Recommendations Report in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations, as well as the remaining recommendations relating to IGO protections from previous GNSO PDPs, including the four out of five recommendations that the GNSO Council approved from the PDP on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms referred to by the GAC in this advice.

ICANN60 Abu Dhabi Communique

1.a.I

Intergovernmental Organization (IGO) Protections

(1 November 2017)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN61 San Juan Communique

1.a.VII

GDPR and WHOIS

(15 March 2018)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As per the Board's 12 May 2021 resolution, the Board has considered the GAC's consensus advice to consider the GAC's Minority Statement. As the 12 May 2021 scorecard states, "the Board will consider all relevant public policy concerns, including those raised by the GAC, along with available legal guidance." The Board has considered the GAC's Minority Statement and continues to confer with the GNSO Council and community to determine next steps regarding the SSAD policy recommendations. On 9 June 2022, the Board agreed to the GNSO Council's request to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations while proceeding with the simpler, more cost effective system design (the system is now called "WHOIS Disclosure System") (the Board's letter is posted at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/botterman-to-fouquart-09jun22-en.pdf). With the publication of the WHOIS Disclosure System Design Paper, the GNSO Council requested the Board to proceed with the implementation and the subsequent running of the WHOIS Disclosure System for up to 2 years while continuing to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations.

ICANN61 San Juan Communique

1.a.VI

GDPR and WHOIS

(15 March 2018)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As per the Board's 12 May 2021 resolution, the Board has considered the GAC's consensus advice to consider the GAC's Minority Statement. As the 12 May 2021 scorecard states, "the Board will consider all relevant public policy concerns, including those raised by the GAC, along with available legal guidance." The Board has considered the GAC's Minority Statement and continues to confer with the GNSO Council and community to determine next steps regarding the SSAD policy recommendations. On 9 June 2022, the Board agreed to the GNSO Council's request to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations while proceeding with the simpler, more cost effective system design (the system is now called "WHOIS Disclosure System") (the Board's letter is posted at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/botterman-to-fouquart-09jun22-en.pdf). With the publication of the WHOIS Disclosure System Design Paper, the GNSO Council requested the Board to proceed with the implementation and the subsequent running of the WHOIS Disclosure System for up to 2 years while continuing to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations.

ICANN61 San Juan Communique

1.a.IV

GDPR and WHOIS

(15 March 2018)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As per the Board's 12 May 2021 resolution, the Board has considered the GAC's consensus advice to consider the GAC's Minority Statement. As the 12 May 2021 scorecard states, "the Board will consider all relevant public policy concerns, including those raised by the GAC, along with available legal guidance." The Board has considered the GAC's Minority Statement and continues to confer with the GNSO Council and community to determine next steps regarding the SSAD policy recommendations. On 9 June 2022, the Board agreed to the GNSO Council's request to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations while proceeding with the simpler, more cost effective system design (the system is now called "WHOIS Disclosure System") (the Board's letter is posted at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/botterman-to-fouquart-09jun22-en.pdf). With the publication of the WHOIS Disclosure System Design Paper, the GNSO Council requested the Board to proceed with the implementation and the subsequent running of the WHOIS Disclosure System for up to 2 years while continuing to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations.

ICANN61 San Juan Communique

2.a.I

IGO Reserved Acronyms

(15 March 2018)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

The GAC is continuing to discuss a proposed mechanism for how it will consider updates that are requested to the IGO List that the GAC submitted to ICANN in 2013, to ensure that in the future the list can be maintained in a manner consistent with Advice in the GAC San Juan Communiqué. The Board had directed that ICANN org conduct a feasibility study in response to the San Juan Communique.

ICANN62 Panama Communique

1.a.I.

GDPR and WHOIS

(28 June 2018)

Phase 4 | Implement

As per the Board's 12 May 2021 resolution, the Board has considered the GAC's consensus advice to consider the GAC's Minority Statement. As the 12 May 2021 scorecard states, "the Board will consider all relevant public policy concerns, including those raised by the GAC, along with available legal guidance." The Board has considered the GAC's Minority Statement and continues to confer with the GNSO Council and community to determine next steps regarding the SSAD policy recommendations. On 9 June 2022, the Board agreed to the GNSO Council's request to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations while proceeding with the simpler, more cost effective system design (the system is now called "WHOIS Disclosure System") (the Board's letter is posted at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/botterman-to-fouquart-09jun22-en.pdf). With the publication of the WHOIS Disclosure System Design Paper, the GNSO Council requested the Board to proceed with the implementation and the subsequent running of the WHOIS Disclosure System for up to 2 years while continuing to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations.

ICANN62 Panama Communique

2.a.II.

Protection of IGO Identifiers

(28 June 2018)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN62 Panama Communique

2.a.III

Protection of IGO Identifiers

(28 June 2018)

Phase 4 | Implement

ICANN org continues to work with the GAC to consider how to facilitate accuracy and completeness of the IGO contacts on the list of IGOs prepared by the GAC.

ICANN64 Kobe Communique

1.a.V

WHOIS and Data Protection Legislation

(14 March 2019)

Phase 4 | Implement

As per the Board's 12 May 2021 resolution, the Board has considered the GAC's consensus advice to consider the GAC's Minority Statement. As the 12 May 2021 scorecard states, "the Board will consider all relevant public policy concerns, including those raised by the GAC, along with available legal guidance." The Board has considered the GAC's Minority Statement and continues to confer with the GNSO Council and community to determine next steps regarding the SSAD policy recommendations. On 9 June 2022, the Board agreed to the GNSO Council's request to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations while proceeding with the simpler, more cost effective system design (the system is now called "WHOIS Disclosure System") (the Board's letter is posted at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/botterman-to-fouquart-09jun22-en.pdf). With the publication of the WHOIS Disclosure System Design Paper, the GNSO Council requested the Board to proceed with the implementation and the subsequent running of the WHOIS Disclosure System for up to 2 years while continuing to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations.

ICANN70 Virtual Community Forum GAC Communique

1.a.i

EPDP Phase 2 Final Report

(25 March 2021)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As per the Board's 12 May 2021 resolution, the Board has considered the GAC's consensus advice to consider the GAC's Minority Statement. As the 12 May 2021 scorecard states, "the Board will consider all relevant public policy concerns, including those raised by the GAC, along with available legal guidance." The Board has considered the GAC's Minority Statement and continues to confer with the GNSO Council and community to determine next steps regarding the SSAD policy recommendations. On 9 June 2022, the Board agreed to the GNSO Council's request to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations while proceeding with the simpler, more cost effective system design (the system is now called "WHOIS Disclosure System") (the Board's letter is posted at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/botterman-to-fouquart-09jun22-en.pdf). With the publication of the WHOIS Disclosure System Design Paper, the GNSO Council requested the Board to proceed with the implementation and the subsequent running of the WHOIS Disclosure System for up to 2 years while continuing to pause the consideration of the SSAD-related recommendations.

ICANN71 Virtual Policy Forum GAC Communique

1.a.i

IGO Protections

(21 June 2021)

Phase 3 | Evaluate & Consider

As noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board's 12 September 2021 resolution on the GAC's ICANN71 Communique, the Board "acknowledges the GAC advice to maintain the current moratorium on second-level registrations of domain names matching the acronyms of IGOs currently on the GAC List (dated March 2013), pending the conclusion of the IGO Work Track" and "emphasizes that the final scope of total protections for IGO acronyms is a matter to be determined through ICANN's policy processes, including the outcomes of the ongoing IGO Work Track (now an EPDP team)." Registry Operators are currently required to withhold the acronyms of the IGOs on the GAC's 2013 list from registration in new gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program. This measure was intended to be temporary while the Board, ICANN org and the community continue to actively work through implementation issues concerning IGO acronyms. The Board has confirmed that these interim reservations will remain in place until the post-registration notification system for IGOs is in place.

The EPDP team that the Board mentioned in the scorecard included GAC members and IGO representatives. The group completed its work in April 2022 and forwarded its recommendations, all of which attained Full Consensus, to the GNSO Council. The GNSO Council approved all the EPDP recommendations in June 2022 and forwarded its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board in July 2022. As required by the Bylaws, the recommendations were posted for Public Comment and the GAC notified at the end of November 2022. The next step will be for the Board to consider the EPDP recommendations as well as the remaining GNSO policy recommendations that remain pending before the Board, including the four recommendations from the previous Policy Development Process on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms that the GNSO Council approved in April 2019.

ICANN72 Virtual Annual General Meeting Communique

1.b.1

Board Scorecard on SSR2 Review Final Report

(1 November 2021)

Phase 4 | Implement

On 16 January 2022, the ICANN Board considered the ICANN72 Virtual Annual General Meeting GAC Communique and provided the following response: The Board approved Recommendations 4.1 and 9.1, which were considered already fully implemented based on the measures of success defined by the SSR2 Review Team in its Final Report, and including rationale for its decision as detailed in the Scorecard accompanying the Board action. With regard to Recommendation 4.1, the Board noted that ICANN org already has policies, plans and programs in place through which Recommendation 4.1 has already been implemented. The Board continues its oversight role over ICANN org's risk management efforts and is supportive of ICANN org in continuing the risk management activities and strategy that it is already carrying out. For Recommendation 9.1, the Board noted that the current Contractual Compliance operations already meet the SSR2 Review Team's defined measures of success for this recommendation as audits are in place, have been completed and been the subject of public reports.

For all Specific Reviews recommendations Implementation Operations, the ICANN org department responsible for overseeing the implementation of non-policy work, is deploying new reporting tools, including implementation documentation for each complete recommendation, quarterly updates on the status of Specific Reviews (first one to be issued in January 2023) and a final implementation report to cover all the recommendations produced by a review team. The enhanced reporting system will support future review teams, SSR3 in the case of SSR2, in the assessment of the recommendations of the previous review cycle. The Bylaws (Section 4.6(b)(iii)) reserve to SSR3 (or other future SSRs) the role of final assessment of the completion of recommendations from prior SSR reviews.

Updates regarding the implementation status of SSR2 recommendations, including implementation documentation for 4.1 and 9.1, may be found at https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/ssr and at https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/SSR2+Review

ICANN72 Virtual Annual General Meeting Communique

1.a.1

Board Scorecard on SSR2 Review Final Report

(1 November 2021)

Phase 4 | Implement

On 16 January 2022, the ICANN Board considered the ICANN72 Virtual Annual General Meeting GAC Communique and provided the following response: The Board agrees that addressing the 34 pending recommendations, noted in the scorecard accompanying the Board resolution 2021.07.22.13, in a timely manner is important.

The SSR2 recommendations approved by the Board on 22 July 2021 went through the FY23 Pilot Prioritization conducted by the community group in April-May 2022. ICANN org convened a dedicated cross-functional project team (hereafter "project team) in June 2022 to address the outcome of the Pilot Prioritization. Using the prioritization proposed by the community group as input, the project team developed a strategy and design for implementation.

With the implementation design complete, the org is now working towards implementation using a cross-functional work plan. To support implementation efforts of prioritized Specific Reviews recommendations, including SSR2, on 16 November 2022 the Board approved the release of resources from the Supplemental Fund for Implementation of Community Recommendations (SFICR).

Since the conclusion of the FY23 Pilot Prioritization, progress has been made towards addressing the implementation of several recommendations as documented on the SSR2 ICANN.org page and community wiki page.

With reference to recommendations pending Board consideration, it is worth noting the following developments:

1. On 1 May 2022, the Board took action on 3 pending recommendations, approving one recommendation which was included in the FY24 prioritization in October 2022, and rejecting the other two.
2. On 16 November 2022, Board action was taken on a set of 21 recommendations, approving 7 as fully implemented, 2 subject to prioritization, and rejecting the others. ICANN org continues to work on the remaining ten pending recommendations.

Implementation Operations and the project team, composed of ICANN org subject matter experts, is also working on appropriately documenting the implementation of recommendations considered complete as well as monitoring and resolving dependencies, where possible, to move Board approved recommendations towards prioritization.

Implementation Operations plans to complement the existing implementation documentation for Specific Reviews recommendations with a final status report that will serve as a central repository for all actions (Board, org or community) on a given review.

ICANN49 Singapore Communique

9.I.

Protection of Red Cross/Red Crescent Names

(27 March 2014)

24 May 2022

The NGPC published a comprehensive report of NGPC responses and updates to GAC Advice regarding the New gTLD Program on 7 October 2015 and provided this response in its scorecard: The GNSO Council approved (https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20131120-2) recommendations from the expedited PDP on 20 November 2013 regarding protections for IGOs and INGOs, which included protections for certain identifiers associated with the Red Cross/Red Crescent. The GNSO forwarded its policy recommendations to the ICANN Board for further consideration. On 30 April 2014, the Board took action (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-04-30-en#/2.a) to adopt the GNSO policy recommendations that are not inconsistent with GAC Advice received by the Board on the topic of protections for certain identifiers of the Red Cross/Red Crescent. With respect to the GNSO policy recommendations that differ from the GAC Advice (https://gac.icann.org/board-resolutions/public/board-resolution-annex-b-20140430.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1401266393000&api=v2) (including this item of GAC Advice) the Board requested additional time to consider them, and continues to facilitate discussions among the relevant parties to reconcile any remaining differences between the policy recommendations and the GAC advice on the topic. (To note, the GNSO policy recommends that instead of reserving the RCRC national society names as advised by the GAC, the names should be bulk added to the Trademark Clearinghouse.) On 11 July 2019 the ICANN Board Chair sent a letter notifying the GAC Chair that the GNSO Council has approved four policy recommendations that were developed by the GNSO's PDP Working Group on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms which include the following points: no substantive changes to existing rights protection mechanisms are needed for INGOs; no specific new dispute resolution procedures should be created for IGOs; and clarifying policy guidance is to be developed as to the filing of complaints by IGOs under the existing procedures. The four recommendations were posted for public comment on 11 July 2019 and will close on 20 August 2019. After the public comment period closes, the Board will meet to consider whether to adopt the four recommendations. The GAC sent a letter to the Board on 20 August 2019 regarding the GNSO PDP on IGO-INGO Access to Curative RPMs Policy Recommendations. The Board provided a response on 14 October 2019. In its 27 January 2019 resolution, the Board directed ICANN org to continue to develop and execute an implementation plan for PDP recommendations adopted by the Board as they pertain to the protection of the Red Cross, Red Crescent, Red Crystal Identifiers and names of national committees designated by the GAC (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-01-27-en#2.d). This was completed and the final Consensus Policy published on 18 February 2020 (see: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/implementation-of-consensus-policy-for-the-protection-of-red-cross--red-crescent-identifiers-18-2-2020-en). Based on this, this item is considered complete and has been moved to Phase 5 and will be closed.

ICANN50 London Communique

6.a.I-III

Protection of Red Cross / Red Crescent Names

(25 June 2014)

24 May 2022

The NGPC published a comprehensive report of NGPC responses and updates to GAC Advice regarding the New gTLD Program on 7 October 2015 and provided this response in its scorecard: On 3 November 2014, the Board notified the GAC that it had some concerns about the advice in the London Communiqué because it appeared to be inconsistent with the framework established in the Bylaws granting the GNSO authority to recommend consensus policies to the Board, and the Board to appropriately act upon policies developed through the bottom-up consensus policy developed by the GNSO. On 25 November 2014, the GAC responded to the Board's letter. The GAC noted that it had carefully considered the Board's letter as well as the relevant section in the London Communiqué. The GAC noted that its intention was to emphasize the urgency of providing protection for Red Cross/Red Crescent names and to state the GAC's view that a solution should not be further delayed pending the outcome of a GNSO PDP. The GAC further recognized that the urgency aspect had since been addressed, as stated in the GAC Los Angeles Communiqué: "The GAC welcomes the decision of the New gTLD Program Committee (Resolution 2014.10.12.NG05) to provide temporary protections for the names of the International Committee of the Red Cross and International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and the 189 National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. The GAC requests the ICANN Board and all relevant parties to work quickly to resolve the longer term issues still outstanding." On 11 July 2019 the ICANN Board Chair sent a letter notifying the GAC Chair that the GNSO Council has approved four policy recommendations that were developed by the GNSO's PDP Working Group on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms which include the following points: no substantive changes to existing rights protection mechanisms are needed for INGOs; no specific new dispute resolution procedures should be created for IGOs; and clarifying policy guidance is to be developed as to the filing of complaints by IGOs under the existing procedures. The four recommendations were posted for public comment on 11 July 2019 and will close on 20 August 2019. After the public comment period closes, the Board will meet to consider whether to adopt the four recommendations. The GAC sent a letter to the Board on 20 August 2019 regarding the GNSO PDP on IGO-INGO Access to Curative RPMs Policy Recommendations. The Board provided a response on 14 October 2019. In its 27 January 2019 resolution, the Board directed ICANN org to continue to develop and execute an implementation plan for PDP recommendations adopted by the Board as they pertain to the protection of the Red Cross, Red Crescent, Red Crystal Identifiers and names of national committees designated by the GAC (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-01-27-en#2.d). This was completed and the final Consensus Policy published on 18 February 2020 (see: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/implementation-of-consensus-policy-for-the-protection-of-red-cross--red-crescent-identifiers-18-2-2020-en). Based on this, this item is considered complete and has been moved to Phase 5 and will be closed.

ICANN61 San Juan Communique

1.b.III.

GDPR and WHOIS

(15 March 2018)

24 May 2022

As per the Board's 30 May 2018 resolution and scorecard, ICANN org's Government Stakeholder and IGO Engagement teams "continue to facilitate regular engagement and capacity building activities with governments around the world. Working with the USRWG work plan GE continues to organize and present capacity building workshops for GAC members on a regional basis with the regional GSE team members and also in association with ICANN meetings. As part of their engagement activities, GE and GSE team members also continue to raise awareness about the changes to the WHOIS system related to compliance with the GDPR, and opportunities for inputs from governments." Some recent examples of the facilitation of discussions conducted by GE were meetings held with the European Data Protection Board (EPDB), the Belgian Data Protection Autority (DPA), conducted ongoing engagement with other European DPAs, as well as engagement with the Council of Europe (CoE), the European Parliament, and the Council of the European Union. As this engagement work has been integrated into ongoing activities conducted by the Government Engagement team, this item is considered complete and will be moved to Phase 5 | Close.

ICANN66 Montréal Communiqué

1.a.I

CCT Review and Subsequent Rounds of New gTLDs

(6 November 2019)

24 May 2022

On 12 September 2021, the Board provided a follow-up on previous advice regarding CCT Review and Subsequent Rounds of New gTLDs. The Board stated in their 12 September 2021 scorecard: "Per its resolution of 01 March 2019, regarding the Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice (CCT) Final Report and Recommendations, the Board noted fourteen recommendations (9, 10, 12, 16, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35) that were neither accepted nor rejected, but communicated, in whole or in part, to the community groups identified in the CCT Final Report for their consideration. Below is an overview to summarize the developments in these recommendations. In its actions on these recommendations, the Board neither accepted, nor rejected the recommendations, as such recommendations related to matters that can only be addressed through community action, notably as the Board does not direct policy work. In practice, this means that the Board, through its decision, stated that consideration of these recommendations is to be made by the community and any potential action initiated by community organizations. For each of these recommendations, while the Board or ICANN org was among the identified groups to which the CCT Review Team directed the recommendation, the Board was careful to respect the remit and roles of the different part of the ICANN community and did not direct ICANN org action that would usurp another group's remit. Therefore, once the Board has taken action of offering the recommendations for community consideration, no further action is to be taken on these recommendations which are considered completed and closed. The Board noted in its rationale accompanying its action on the CCT Final Report: "Passing recommendations through to community groups is not a directive that the groups identified should formally address any of the issues within those recommendations. It is within the purview of each group to identify whether work will be taken on and the topics that the group will address. For transparency, however, it would be helpful to have records or reporting made available to the ICANN community on how the community group considered the items coming out of the CCT-RT. The Board encourages any level of reporting that the groups are able to provide as the ICANN org and Board track action on the CCT-RT's recommendations." The Board thanks the GAC for its follow up on previous GAC advice concerning the CCT Review and subsequent rounds of New gTLDS. As the GAC noted in its 22 January 2020 response letter to the ICANN Board on issues of clarification of GAC Advice, the portions of GAC Advice that were related to the "passed through" CCT Recommendations have neither been accepted nor rejected. As we have previously committed, the fact that these CCT Recommendations were passed through to the community does not alter the Board's obligations to consider any advice from the GAC that impacts the Board's consideration of the policy recommendations on Subsequent Procedures. The Board's commitment on this issue was made most recently in May 2021 in a Scorecard responding to the ICANN70 GAC Communique. If the GAC has any remaining questions about topics addressed by recommendations in the CCT Final Report that were not included in the list of recommendations that the Board approved, the GAC may consider posing its own questions to the Board on these subjects (without reference to the CCT recommendations), and the Board stands ready to discuss further with the GAC. While the Board always welcomes and encourages any level of reporting that the groups are able to provide with regard to these recommendations, the Board would also encourage the GAC to continue to take advantage of the GNSO liaison to the GAC, who is primarily responsible for providing timely updates to the GAC on GNSO policy development activities in order to complement the existing notification processes as well answering questions in relation to these (GNSO) activities that GAC members may have. With regards to tracking and implementation of recommendations, as noted in its webinar on 2 June 2021, during the prep week session of ICANN71, ICANN org provided an update on the status of all reviews, including CCT, and noted that it is working to develop a robust and comprehensive reporting mechanism on the recommendations accepted by the Board. In addition, there is also a dedicated webpage on ICANN.org that provides latest information on the status of the CCT Recommendations accepted by the Board: https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/cct As the Board noted in its resolution of May 2021 in a Scorecard, responding to the ICANN71 GAC Communique: The Board understands that ICANN org is continuing with preparatory implementation planning for #5 along with other data collection recommendations. For #14 & #15, the Board had directed ICANN org to facilitate community efforts to develop a definition of "abuse" to inform further action on this recommendation. The Board has continued to follow the community's discussions on this and other aspects of DNS abuse mitigation, including the recommendations from the SSR2 Review Team and the recently issued advice from the SSAC. The Board understands that ICANN org has since completed implementation of #17 and that implementation is in progress for the other accepted recommendations as feasible with existing resources and budget. For those which require additional resourcing to implement, these will be subject to the prioritization and planning process under development for the community to consider the numerous recommendations from review teams and other efforts such as Work Stream 2, and how to organize and resource the work. #9 and #12 were communicated to the GNSO as they concern gTLD policy development within the GNSO's remit. The Board has received the GNSO Council's Recommendations Report on RPMs and SubPro and will consider the final report and recommendations." Based on this, this item is considered completed and will be moved to Phase 5 and closed.

ICANN66 Montréal Communiqué

2.b.II

Domain Name Registration Directory Service and Data Protection - Phase 2 of the EPDP

(6 November 2019)

24 May 2022

On 26 January 2020, the Board considered the Montreal Communique and provided this response in its scorecard: "The Board notes that, currently, ICANN Contractual Compliance does not offer specific complaint forms for complaints related to obligations created under the Temporary Specification. ICANN Contractual Compliance is in the process of migrating to a new ticketing system ("NSp Compliance") that will allow it to easily create "smart forms" tailored to individual complaint types and to track and report granular data associated with each complaint type. NSp Compliance will include smart forms for Temp Spec-related complaints, including those concerning third-party access requests. Migration to NSp is expected to occur in 3Q2020. Accordingly, and in light of the above, the Board accepts the GAC's advice and instructs ICANN org as part of the roll out of NSp Compliance to publish clear instructions on the ICANN Compliance web page describing how to submit a complaint concerning a third-party access request. Additionally, the Board instructs ICANN org to compile and publish monthly metrics data related to third-party access complaints once such forms are available in the new ticketing system. The Board understands that the GAC provided additional clarifications to this advice in a letter on 22 January 2020. The Board will consider when and if further action is needed on this item after review of the GAC clarifications and after continued discussion with the GAC." In their 29 August 2020 ICANN69 meeting presentation, ICANN org's Contractual Compliance announced their recent migration to a new ticketing system ("NSp Compliance" https://www.icann.org/compliance/complaint). The new ticketing system allows for "greater functionality and improved data-capturing capabilities for enhanced reporting" and "Include specific forms for Temporary Specification-related complaints, including third party access to gTLD Registration Data." (see: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/presentation-compliance-07oct20-en.pdf; https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-montreal66-gac-advice-scorecard-26jan20-en.pdf) Based on this, this item is considered completed and will be moved to Phase 5 and closed.