en

Board Activities and Meetings

View records of actions and decisions made by the ICANN Board from recent activities and meetings.

Minutes | Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee (BAMC) Meeting | 11 January 2022

BAMC Attendees: Alan Barrett, Becky Burr, Edmon Chung, Sarah Deutsch, Patricio Poblete, León Sánchez, and Katrina Sataki

Other Board Member Attendees: Manal Ismail and Göran Marby

ICANN organization Attendees: Franco Carrasco (Board Operations Specialist), John Crain (Chief Security, Stability, and Resiliency Officer), Andrew Dickson (gTLD Services Manager), Samantha Eisner (Deputy General Counsel), John Jeffrey (General Counsel and Secretary), Sheila Johnson (Deputy General Counsel), Elizabeth Le (Associate General Counsel), Catherine Maleki (Counsel), Amy Stathos (Deputy General Counsel), Theresa Swinehart (SVP, Global Domains and Strategy), and Russ Weinstein (VP, GDD Accounts and Services)


The following is a summary of discussions, actions taken, and actions identified:

  1. Procedural Evaluation of Reconsideration Request 21-3: Dot Hip Hop LLC: Edmon Chung recused himself from the discussion and consideration of Reconsideration Request 21-3, noting potential conflicts. The BAMC received a briefing and materials prepared by ICANN's external counsel on a request for reconsideration submitted by Dot Hip Hop, LLC (Requestor), challenging alleged ICANN staff inaction on a request for assignment of the .HIPHOP generic top-level domain (gTLD) from the current registry holder, UNR Co. (UNR), to the Requestor. Specifically, the Requestor alleges that UNR requested approval of assignment of the .HIPHOP gTLD to the Requestor on 11 August 2021 and that ICANN staff's "failure to approve the assignment" since then violates the Registry Agreement between UNR and ICANN organization (ICANN org or the org) and ICANN org's Mission, Commitments, and Core Values as set forth in the ICANN Bylaws. Article 4, Section 4.2(k) of the ICANN Bylaws provides that upon receipt of a reconsideration request, the BAMC is to review the request "to determine if it is sufficiently stated." In evaluating whether a reconsideration request is sufficiently stated, the following factors are considered: (1) is the reconsideration request timely; and (2) does the requestor meet the requirements for bringing a reconsideration request? The BAMC concluded that Request 21-3 is sufficiently stated because it was timely filed and also sufficiently identifies the ICANN Bylaws provisions and established ICANN policies that ICANN org allegedly violated. Further, the Requestor has sufficiently asserted that it has been adversely affected by the challenged conduct. The BAMC noted that a substantive review of the merits of the Requesotr's claims is beyond the scope of the procedural evaluation.

    • Action: ICANN org to notify Requestor and continue processing Reconsideration Request 21-3 in accordance with the reconsideration process.

Published on 04 February 2022