Accountability-Cross-Community

Download

accountability-cross-community@icann.org

September 2016

38 participants
32 discussions

Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 SO/AC Accountability Subgroup Meeting #5 - 1 Sept
by Brenda Brewer Sept. 6, 2016

Sept. 6, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for WS2 SO/AC Accountability Subgroup Meeting #5 - 1 September 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/XRKsAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes 1. Call Admin and Roll Call / Apologies (2min- Staff) Cheryl Langdon-Orr audio only 2. Welcome - Opening Remarks (3min- SDB, FB, CLO) * Steve DelBianco: There was no clear decision on SO/AC accountability question at the CCWG plenary on last Tuesday. Will present the slides presented at the plenary. (presentation of slides https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=59643284&preview=/… ) * Cheryl Langdon-Orr: ccNSO has always sought non-member participantion. Other SOACs may also have other interesting and unique mechanisms they use. * Farzaneh Badii: 2 questions are who are we accountable to and what are we accountable for. * Steve DelBianco: We know SO's are responsible to their members per the Bylaws - what we are looking at is do we need to increase this accountability. * Christopher Wilkinson: The Bylaws are clear. What we are talking about is the accountability of the delegates of the SOACs in the new Empowered Community. The incremental new accountability in the new accountability scheme in ICANN. * Farzaneh Badii: the MAR could be used as a soft approach to share best practices. Given there are no other questions let us move to the next agenda item. * Matthew Shears: the issue of scope has to be agreed - Christopher's approach (I understand) seeks to look at what the new accountability requirements post transition, but others, including myself, believe that this is about the accountability of SOs and ACs generally, not just post transition 3. Review (brief) of last call #3 and any Action Items / Business Arising (5 min- SDB, FB) (skipped) 4. Discussion (25 min) - To whom are the SO/ACs accountable to - What are the SO/ACs accountable for - Discuss Matt's suggestion to start from track three: "Develop a detailed working plan on enhancing SO and AC accountability taking into consideration the comments made during the public comment period on the Third Draft Proposal." Googledoc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WTRZZJ9B3Q6BHP6AlDHmoiep8NeshNpomBNM4bB… * Mathew Shears: accountability has 4 dimensions: Transparency, Consultation, Review, Redress. We should consider this when considering how to scope our work. MAR may be a distraction, we should start with the workplan. * Steve DelBianco: Appendix C contains a number of elements for ICANN when we began the work on WS1 and it may not be reasonable to think we should apply this to SOACs. * Mathew Shears: agree Steve. But we have addressed and resolved some of these criteria in WS1 and see if they could apply although many may not apply. * Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Mathew Shear's suggestion has meritt to explore these aspects and should be pursued. This could provide the basis for several sections of our report. * Steve DelBianco: Our charter says Review and Develop and we have to do the reviews to identify gaps. If you have criteria ahead of time it makes it easier to identify those potential gaps. * Cheryl Langdon-Orr: If we actually capture what is going on now and compare it will be very useful. * Athina Fragkouli: These should not be hard criteria - more points of reference. * Mathew Shears: We need to work with the SO and ACs if we are going to succeed. * Steve Delbianco: If members from the SO and ACs could come back at the next meeting to present the accountability mechanisms in each of these which are NOT in the Bylaws. 5. AOB / Next Meeting (5min) * Steve DelBianco: Adjourned.

2 1

Notes, recordings and transcript for WS2 Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #3 | 30 August
by MSSI Secretariat Sept. 5, 2016

Sept. 5, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Human Resources Subgroup Meeting #3 -30 August 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/CxKsAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc * Dan Appleman phone only * Nigel Roberts - excuses. 2. Discussion on: the Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… * Tatiana Tropina: no progress this week. Will simply add the text from the WS1 Final report. * Niels ten Oever: Hope to complete this document next week. 3. Discussion on: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_… * Niels ten Oever: Given the sad news from Paul Twomey there has been no progress as expected. It would be great if we could keep adding concerns to this doc. * Tatiana Tropina: I have been going through teh records on the calls and chats to put them into the concerns doc but I am waiting for Paul because he was supposed to lead this one. but once Paul is back I will be ready with info :) 4. Discussion on: FoI draft document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1emqmzyB9_0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVnkBYUO… * Niels ten Oever: Should the Framework be a core value? We should ask this of ICANN legal as to what the implications of being core value imply. does nayone have an issue with this - no. * Paul McGrady: Seems like we would want to ask the community that, rather than the lawyers. * Tatiana Tropina: So basically you want to ask ICANN legal about this as a starting point for our further discussion? * Kavous Arateh: views of lawyers should not be priveleged, everyone has input. * Anne Aikman-Scalese: have no issue with asking ICANN legal. Still unclear what a human rights policy vs policy development activities in ICANN. Would such a human rights policy imply that ICANN would have to make a human rights assessment of the propose registry before contracting to delegate a TLD? * Niels ten Oever: you should include these in the document. * Tatiana Tropina: ICANN legal added the term core value and we should ask them why they did so. * Niels ten Oever: any views on this? * Paul McGrady: Agree. I'd like to know why they made that unilateral change, but I don't think we need them to define "core" for us. * Farzaneh Badii: Let us find out who suggested using Core Value. * Daniel Appelman: I disagree with separating policy from operations. That would weaken any human rights commitment we recommend as a policy matter. Operations should be consistent with policy. * Niels Ten Oever: Will ask staff to pass on this question to ICANN legal - ACTION ITEM. Niels ten Oever: Question to ICANN legal: 'What is the rationale for the addition of 'core values' to the ICANN bylaws, and what are its legal and non-legal implications in your opinion, especially for the human rights bylaw? * Niels Ten Oever: What is meant by International Human Rights? I have pasted several refernces in the document which could help with this. * Tatiana Tropina: Uncertain that these instruments which are applicable to states are not applicable to ICANN. They can help shape of things for ICANN. * Kavous Arasteh: We should go through these and see which parts could apply to ICANN. * Tatiana Tropina: I think Kavouss misunderstood me Of course we should go through them I was clear about this. I am more than up for going through all the conventions. * Anne Aikman-Scalese: to what parts of ICANN should Human rights apply? It would certainly include awarding a TLD. We should identify policies and procedures and activities in ICANN which would be subject to HR. * Paul McGrady: starting with the principles and then look at how they apply is my approach - but we should end up in the same place. * Markus Kummer: The Board was very worried about unintended consequences. the baseline for ICANN will probably remain the Rugge principals and which ones apply and see where we can go from there. * Avri Doria: an explicit exhaustive list of operations? * Anne Aikman-Scalese: @AVri - no - just certain test examples - how do Human Rights principles apply to specific activities of ICANN - a practical application of principles in certain examples of ICANN's operations. * Tatiana Tropina: I think there has been some job done on this at the CCWP on human rights which might be interesting to look at, Niels, do you have anything to share on this? * Matthew Shears: I would turn that around Ann and suggest that we need to look at ICANN's operations and determine very realistically and cautiously what might apply or not. * Matthew Shears: this should not be about trying to see what fits - but rather what is appropriate - measured against other orgs and institutions perhaps * Farzaneh Badii: What we need to consider what is in ICANN's scope. Does this imply that there are going to be contractual provisions for Human Rights in registry agreements? I think the ICANN responsability stops at the string level (unclear what is meant by string level). * Kavous Arasteh: Seems chair is unfair in analysing comments by particpants. * Anne Aikman-Scalese: @Niels - I think the document you linked presupposes a negative impact on Human Rights in all cases. For example, it states that there is a "right to use all words and names in domain names". There is actually no such right and the entire scheme of trademark protection for the new gTLDs demonstrates the balancing of freedom of expression against the right of the artistic community to protect its artistic creations. This is Article 19 versus Article 27 UDHR balancing. ARticle 27 says: (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author. * Niels ten Oever: We will discuss this on the list. We should go on to the issue of Applicable Law. Do we want to relay this to the Jurisdiction sub-group. * Kavouss Arasteh: Leave to the Jurisdiction sub-group., * Niels ten Oever: Will contact Jursidiction to advise we will wait on their results regarding this. * Anne Aikman-Scalese 2: ICANN Legal should be asked what Human Rights Law is applicable to ICANN operations. * Niels ten Oever: 2. 'What Human Rights Laws and/or Guidelines is or are applicable to which ICANN operations.' * Anne Aikman-Scalese 2: should this be tgwo separate questions. Which laws and then guidelines. * Daniel Appelman: Getting the views of legal counsel is ok; but our own work this week should be to think about all relevant ICANN operations and activities and then discuss what human rights are implicated by them. Via mailing list and comments in the document. 5. AOB

1 0