Please suggest agenda items for the next call on 29 Feb 2016.
I see the following items in the notes from the previous meeting on 15 Feb:
* Announcement to operational communities that they may view the draft in Google Docs at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oR3nmHl1fK7BEWOBK65KyvnmhTJZX70j9q4Ne9i4ad4/edit?usp=sharing.
* Tentative acceptance of non-controversial edits
* Edit the document to explicitly give ICANN the right to sublicense rights to PTI.
* Edit the document to say that the IETF Trust will be registrant and admin contact, and ICANN will be tech contact. (Do we need to re-open that discussion, making ICANN only the tech contact and the Trust both registrar and admin contact?)
* Edit the document to outline the requirements for multiple approvals for any change.
* Edit the document to say that the IANA IPR Governance Council (“IIGC”) will have 3 representatives from each operational community.
* Edit the document to clarify that exclusive licences will be restricted to use of the IPR in connection with provision of the IANA functions.
* Edit the document to mention the cases of IANA registries not managed by ICANN, and non-IANA registries managed by the ICANN IANA department.
Alan Barrett
It might be good to talk about the new name of PTI. Do we think we need to be explicit that whatever the name is, all services remain at iana.org?
On 27 Feb 2016, at 09:46, Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com wrote:
It might be good to talk about the new name of PTI. Do we think we need to be explicit that whatever the name is, all services remain at iana.org?
Thanks.
I’d also like to add discussion of the name of IIGC.
Alan
Proposed agenda for the call on 29 February 2016
1. Review of changes agreed during the previous call.
1.1. Tentative acceptance of non-controversial edits.
Edits have been “accepted”.
1.2. Edits regarding right to sublicense rights to PTI.
Text has been edited.
1.3. Edits regarding regitrant, administrative contact, tech contact.
Text has been edited to say that the Trust should be the Registrant and Administrative Contact, and ICANN should be the Technical contact.
There’s still an open question about the administrative contact: Should it be ICANN or the Trust?
1.4. Edits regarding multiple approvals.
Text has been edited.
1.5. Edits regarding number of members of IIGC.
Text has been edited to say 3 members from each operational community.
1.6. Edits regarding exclusive licence being restricted to use in connection with the provision of the IANA functions.
1.7. Edits to mention IANA registries not managed by ICANN, and non-IANA registries managed by the ICANN IANA department.
Text has not yet been edited.
2. Update on discussion in operational communities.
The draft “Principle Terms” draft document is in Google Docs at this URL: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oR3nmHl1fK7BEWOBK65KyvnmhTJZX70j9q4Ne9i4ad4/edit?usp=sharing.
Have all operational communities stared discussing it? Is there any notable feedback?
3. Implications of the new name of PTI.
Do we think we need to be explicit that whatever the name is, all services remain at iana.org?
4. Name of IIGC.
Could we find a better name than IANA IPR Governance Council (IIGC)?
5. Next steps.
Apologies (and sigh) I missed the call. For some reason I had not entered it to my calendar.
What did you guys decide?
Jari
participants (3)
-
Alan Barrett -
Andrew Sullivan -
Jari Arkko