Skip to main content
Resources

Minutes | Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee (BAMC) Meeting

Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee (BAMC) Attendees: Becky Burr, Sarah Deutsch, Chris Disspain (Chair), León Sanchez, and Mike Silber

Other Board Member Attendees: Avri Doria

ICANN Organization Attendees: Franco Carrasco (Board Operations Specialist), John Jeffrey (General Counsel and Secretary), Vinciane Koenigsfeld (Director, Board Operations), Elizabeth Le (Associate General Counsel), and Amy Stathos (Deputy General Counsel)


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

  1. Litigation Update – The BAMC received a litigation update.
  2. Reconsideration Request 18-4 – Becky Burr recused herself from the discussion, noting potential conflicts. The Committee received a briefing on Reconsideration Request 18-4, which was submitted by dotgay LLC, seeking reconsideration of ICANN Board Resolutions 2018.03.15.08 through 2018.03.15.11 (collectively, the Resolutions) which concluded the Community Priority Evaluation (CPE) Process Review. dotgay LLC claims that, "ICANN Board's adoption of reports based on such inadequate factual development violates its commitment to fairness," and is inconsistent with ICANN organization's commitments to transparency, multistakeholder policy development, promoting well-informed decisions based on expert advice, applying documented policies consistently, neutrally, objectively, and fairly without discrimination, and operating with efficiency and excellence. Pursuant to Article 4, Section 4.2(l) of the Bylaws, ICANN org transmitted Request 18-4 to the Ombudsman for consideration, and the Ombudsman recused himself. Upon discussion, the BAMC concluded that Request 18-4 does not warrant reconsideration because the Board acted consistent with the Guidebook and did not violate ICANN's Mission, Commitments and Core Values when it passed the Resolutions. Specifically, the Board considered all material information when it adopted the Resolutions, including the CPE Process Review Reports, and that the Reports identified the materials which were considered by FTI Consulting (FTI). The Rationale in support of the Resolutions also noted that the Board considered the correspondence received after the publication of the CPE Process Review Reports in adopting the Resolutions. The BAMC concluded that the arguments raised in Request 18-4 are based upon dotgay LLC's disagreement with the results of the CPE Process Review and the methodology undertaken by FTI, but that is not a basis for reconsideration. Moreover, as the Board directed in the Resolutions, the BAMC will consider the CPE Process Review Reports along with all of the materials in the course of the BAMC's evaluation of dotgay LLC's Request 16-3 (just as the Board will consider all of the materials submitted by the dotgay LLC in connection with Request 16-3). Accordingly, the BAMC approved a recommendation to the Board that Request 18-4 be denied.
    • Action: ICANN org to prepare relevant materials for Board consideration of Request 18-4, which should include any rebuttal submitted by dotgay LLC to the BAMC's recommendation.
  3. Reconsideration Request 18-5 – Becky Burr recused herself from the discussion, noting potential conflicts. The Committee received a briefing on Reconsideration Request 18-5, which was submitted by DotMusic Limited (DML), seeking reconsideration of ICANN Board Resolutions 2018.03.15.08 through 2018.03.15.11 (collectively, the Resolutions) which concluded the CPE Process Review. DML claims that claims that, "(1) the CPE review is procedurally and methodologically deficient; (2) the CPE Review failed to perform a substantive analysis of the CPE process; and (3) the Resolutions were adopted in violation of ICANN's Bylaws." Pursuant to Article 4, Section 4.2(l) of the Bylaws, ICANN org transmitted Request 18-5 to the Ombudsman for consideration, and the Ombudsman recused himself. Upon discussion, the BAMC concluded that Request 18-5 does not warrant reconsideration because the Board acted consistent with the Guidebook and did not violate ICANN's Mission, Commitments and Core Values when it passed the Resolutions. Accordingly, for the reasons discussed in the BAMC's consideration Request 18-4, which, but for the party seeking reconsideration, is virtually the same as Request 18-5, as both Requests are submitted by the same law firm, the BAMC approved a recommendation to the Board that Request 18-5 be denied.
    • Action: ICANN org to prepare relevant materials for Board consideration of Request 18-5, which should include any rebuttal submitted by DML to the BAMC's recommendation.
  4. Reconsideration Request 18-6 - Becky Burr recused herself from the discussion, noting potential conflicts. The Committee received a briefing on Reconsideration Request 18-6, which was submitted by Travel Reservations SRL, Minds + Machines Group Limited, Radix FZC, dot Hotel Inc., and Fegistry LLC (collectively, the Requestors) seeking reconsideration of ICANN Board Resolutions 2018.03.15.08 through 2018.03.15.11 (collectively, the Resolutions) which concluded the CPE Process Review. The Requestors claim that the Resolutions are contrary to ICANN org's commitments to transparency and to applying documented policies in a consistent, neutral, objective, and fair manner. Pursuant to Article 4, Section 4.2(l) of the Bylaws, ICANN org transmitted Request 18-6 to the Ombudsman for consideration, and the Ombudsman recused himself. Upon discussion, the BAMC concluded that Request 18-6 does not warrant reconsideration because the Board acted consistent with the Guidebook and did not violate ICANN's Mission, Commitments and Core Values when it passed the Resolutions. That is, the Board considered all material information when it adopted the Resolutions, including the CPE Process Review Reports, and that the Reports identified the materials which were considered by FTI. The Rationale in support of the Resolutions specify that the Board considered the correspondence received after the publication of the CPE Process Review Reports in adopting the Resolutions. For many of the same reasons specified above for Requests 18-4 and 18-5, BAMC approved a recommendation to the Board that Request 18-6 be denied.
    • Action: ICANN org to prepare relevant materials for Board consideration of Request 18-6, which should include any rebuttal submitted by the Requestors to the BAMC's recommendation.
Domain Name System
Internationalized Domain Name ,IDN,"IDNs are domain names that include characters used in the local representation of languages that are not written with the twenty-six letters of the basic Latin alphabet ""a-z"". An IDN can contain Latin letters with diacritical marks, as required by many European languages, or may consist of characters from non-Latin scripts such as Arabic or Chinese. Many languages also use other types of digits than the European ""0-9"". The basic Latin alphabet together with the European-Arabic digits are, for the purpose of domain names, termed ""ASCII characters"" (ASCII = American Standard Code for Information Interchange). These are also included in the broader range of ""Unicode characters"" that provides the basis for IDNs. The ""hostname rule"" requires that all domain names of the type under consideration here are stored in the DNS using only the ASCII characters listed above, with the one further addition of the hyphen ""-"". The Unicode form of an IDN therefore requires special encoding before it is entered into the DNS. The following terminology is used when distinguishing between these forms: A domain name consists of a series of ""labels"" (separated by ""dots""). The ASCII form of an IDN label is termed an ""A-label"". All operations defined in the DNS protocol use A-labels exclusively. The Unicode form, which a user expects to be displayed, is termed a ""U-label"". The difference may be illustrated with the Hindi word for ""test"" — परीका — appearing here as a U-label would (in the Devanagari script). A special form of ""ASCII compatible encoding"" (abbreviated ACE) is applied to this to produce the corresponding A-label: xn--11b5bs1di. A domain name that only includes ASCII letters, digits, and hyphens is termed an ""LDH label"". Although the definitions of A-labels and LDH-labels overlap, a name consisting exclusively of LDH labels, such as""icann.org"" is not an IDN."