- Accountability-Cross-Community

Notes, recordings and transcript for Diversity Subgroup Meeting #17 | 6 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 6, 2017

April 6, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Diversity Subgroup Meeting #17 – 6 April 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/_r-RAw A copy of the action items and notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) [cid:image001.png@01D2AEDD.AF324B40] Action Items: * Fiona Asonga – to write to Co-Chairs requesting publication of the questionnaire per the decisions on this. · Fiona Asonga – to write to drafting group to clean up current draft to begin work with the objective of completing a first draft for public comment by ICANN59. Notes (including relevant portions of chat): 9 Participants at start of call. 1. Roll Call 2. Status of Action Items Fiona Asonga - both completed. Review of participants to the drafting team. Bernard Turcotte – Co-Chairs have made the request to ICANN for interpretation of Diversity meetings. Please note that within a few weeks all CCWG-Accountability meeting will have English captioning at least until the end of June 2017. 3. Work plan with regards to plenary feedback Fiona Asonga - We have been asked to reconsider when we publish the questionnaire by the co-chairs. We should post the questionnaire to receive general input as well as to the SOACs. Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: 42 days for public comments Julie Hammer (SSAC): Could we ask for 42 days, even though not a public comment, recognizing that we cannot dictate. avri doria: if we can't impose a date, then any date we suggest should be fine Fiona Asonga - would recommend 42 days for responses to questionnaire. Should we translate? Julia Charvolen: The question came from the LAC region in the GAC. One of the GAC representatives from the LAC region proposed to translate the questionnaire in Spanish. Julia Charvolen: The GAC Leadership asked the question about the questionnaire being translated Amal Al-Saqqaf: I don't think so Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: I always support translations Abdeldjalil Bachar Bong: i think before their answer so their members need to understand the questionnaire Julie Hammer (SSAC): Is it an option to post the English version first and follow up with translations? Abdeldjalil Bachar Bong: in their language (French ...) avri doria: ummm, once we start to translate, one can wonder why discriminate against any language. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: FR ES EN as a min, best if can be 6 UN if possible plus Portuguese Abdeldjalil Bachar Bong: we need to show the diversity that we defend now Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: do remember we are the DIVERSITY WG avri doria: otherwise it can look like we only care about diversity of some non english speakers Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: yup avri doria: i.e. wee work in parallel? Amal Al-Saqqaf: agree with that but it depends on the plan of the diversity subgroup deadlines avri doria: of course taking a sevral month vaca from diversity work, can work as well. Andreea Brambilla: Agreed, we incorporate responses as they come in. But final responses will be required to confirm status quo, views of SOs/ACs etc Julie Hammer - work in parallel is what we have committed to do and makes sense given timing. Fiona Asonga - any objections/ (none). So the drafting team will clean up the document which will give time to have 3 readings and the readjust the document. Once everyone is comfortable we can send it to the plenary. Bernard Turcotte - Staff can assist with editing the document if the team wishes. 4. A.O.B Fiona Asonga - Any AOB's? (none) Adjourned. Decisions: * Request the Co-Chairs send the questionnaire to the SOACs in English ASAP requesting a response in 42 days. * Request the Co-Chairs publish the questionnaire similarly to the Jurisdiction questionnaire in all the ICANN languages + Portuguese requesting a response in 42 days from the date of publishing. * The Diversity sub-group will not interrupt its work on publishing a draft set of recommendations for June 2017 while the questionnaire is active. Action Items: * Fiona Asonga – to write to Co-Chairs requesting publication of the questionnaire per the decisions on this. * Fiona Asonga – to write to drafting group to clean up current draft to begin work with the objective of completing a first draft for public comment by ICANN59. Diversity meetings to the end of June o Friday 31 March 1900 o Thursday 6 April 1300 o Thursday 13 April 1300 o Thursday 20 April 1300 o Wednesday 26 April 1300 o Thursday 4 May 1300 o Friday 12 May 1300 o Thursday 18 May 1300 o Thursday 25 May 1300 o Thursday 1 June 1300 o Thursday 8 June 1900 o Thursday 15 June 1900 o Thursday 22 June 1900 Documents Presented * WS2 DIVERSITY REPORT – Draft V2.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64077818/WS2%20DIVERSITY%2…>

1 0

CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Current Public Consultations
by Bernard Turcotte April 5, 2017

April 5, 2017

All, As you are aware there are currently two active public consultations for the CCWG-Accountability: - Transparency which closes on 10 April - Guidelines for Good Faith which closes on 24 April To date these have not received significant input and the Co-Chairs would appreciate your assistance in identifying any comments that you expect will be made to these consultations in the coming days. Please reply to me directly (and not to the list - so please do not REPLY ALL) and I will compile these for the Co-Chairs. Thanking you in advance for you support. Bernard Turcotte for the Co-Chairs. ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2

1 0

Notes, recordings and transcript for WS2 Human Rights Subgroup Meeting # 25 | 4 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 5, 2017

April 5, 2017

Hello all, Please see the notes, recordings, and transcript for the CCWG Accountability WS2 Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #25 here; https://community.icann.org/x/4bnRAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) [cid:image001.png@01D2AE06.39841540] Notes (includes relevant text from chat): 12 participants at start of call. 1. Administrivia-Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc Niels ten Oever - No changes to SOIs. 2. Second Reading (of two) of the Considerations document Niels ten Oever – (going through the Google doc - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rDYyuXacrSYDtlSK5JqNQe7XOX2LbM86AzfDay8… ) Niels ten Oever: (typo correction) A particular Human Right should not be considered in isolation since Human Rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated. Kavouss Arasteh - Uncertain we should use METHOD applies - there is no METHOD. Delete METHODS FOR use THE DEVELOPMENT OF ANY NEW.... Niels ten Oever: The development of any new policies or frameworks that may be needed to apply the Human Rights Core Value will be dictated by the type of policy and how ICANN the organization and the community develop those policies. Andrew Mack: sounds good to me as well Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): fine by me also David McAuley (RySG) 2: fine here Kavouss Arasteh - PROPOSES to whom? suggest remove PROPOSE and use DEVELOP. Niels ten Oever: In order to do so ICANN the organization should develop a framework, which should include multistakeholder involvement, and regular review. David McAuley (RySG) 2: propose includes the community more clearly doesn't it Andrew Mack - PROPOSES TO THE COMMUNITY BROADLY. Kavouss Arasteh - that works. Niels ten Oever: In order to do so ICANN the organization should propose a framework to the community, which should include multistakeholder involvement in its development, and regular review. David McAuley (RySG) 2: sounds good Kavouss Arasteh - always have had problem with the last para. Not 100% satisfied but accept as the best we can get. David McAuley (RySG) 2: Nice comment Kavouss, I also think this last para is good Niels ten Oever - this completes our second reading. Unless there are objections I will merge this with the FOI and submit to the plenary for first reading. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): excellent Andrew Mack: double dip Markus Kummer: Well done, all! Niels ten Oever: fulll consensus of the subgroup, congratulations everyone Kavouss Arasteh - We need to avoid modifications in plenary - this was hard won consensus here and any changes proposed in the plenary need to be brought back to this group and would suggest we make this clear in the plenary. Niels ten Oever - agree - we will have to defend these documents in plenary. 3. AOB Kavouss Arasteh - Great thanks to our rapporteur and members of the drafting team, as well as the secretariat. Andrew Mack: here here David McAuley (RySG) 2: Agree with Kavouss Niels ten Oever: Fully agree Markus Kummer: +1 Kavouss - well said! Andrew Mack: well led Niels Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): good job so far people... important work... now needs to go to the next steps with Plenary and Pc Niels ten Oever - lets not forget its not then end - if we get through the plenary we then go to public comment. Adjourned.

1 0

FoI-HR and Considerations - Human Rights Subgroup Full Consensus
by Niels ten Oever April 4, 2017

April 4, 2017

Dear Plenary, It is with great pleasure that I can share with you the 'Proposed Framework of Interpretation and Considerations concerning the ICANN Human Rights bylaw' on behalf of the CCWG Human Rights Subgroup. The first part of this document is the proposed Framework of Interpretation for the ICANN Bylaw on Human Rights. The second part of this document addresses the “considerations” listed in paragraph 24 of Annex 12 of the CCWG Accountability Final Report. This document was produced by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN’s Accountability Sub Group on Human Rights (CCWG SG HR) for discussion in the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN’s accountability (CCWG) plenary. This is a full consensus document produced by the CCWG SG HR. You can find the document attached as well as here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17AvMLBfT8BmC3gUOTvaIuTuEqMbgiporUwqNymv… We're looking forward to discuss this in the plenary. Sincerely yours, Niels Rapporteur of the CCWG Human Rights Subgroup PS Note that the Framework of Interpreation part of the document has not changed since the two readings that have already been done in the plenary. -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3

1 0

Notes and documents for WS2 Ombudsman Subgroup Meeting #20 | 03 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 4, 2017

April 4, 2017

Hello all, The notes and documents displayed for CCWG Accountability WS2_ CCWG Ombudsman Subgroup, Meeting #20 - 03 April 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/VsDRAw A copy of the agenda & notes may be found below. Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux (MSSI) Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives Projects & Operations Assistant. ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Email: yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org Cell: +1-310-460-8432 Skype: yvette.guigneaux.icann www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/> [cid:image001.png@01D2ACD2.2F296F80] ________________________________ Ombudsman Subgroup Meeting #20 04 April 2017 @ 19:00 UTC Agenda: Roll Call / Apologies - Welcome Participation & Dashboard External review of the ICANN Ombuds Office Interviews Survey Next meeting #21 ? April 2017 AOB Notes (includes relevant text from chat): 11 Participants at start of call Roll Call / Apologies - Welcome Bernard Turcotte - (SB audio issues) Voice only - all identified - No changes to SOI's Participation & Dashboard Sebastien Bachollet - Dashboard will be published anon. External review of the ICANN Ombuds Office Lars Hoffmann - Survey should be completed today and the announcement has been prepared. Once it is ready we will distribute to this group so it can be advertised as widely as possible. Sebastien Bachollet - Should we do a final review before it goes live? Lars Hoffmann - SB if you identify a few people then we can obtain a final check. Sébastien Bachollet - Great send to me and I will distribute to those who really participate and get you a response in 48 hours latest. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): time is of the essence Sébastien Bachollet - update on interviews - need help reaching people? Lars Hoffmann - I need to be out of that loop for confidentiality and conflict of interest reasons. Have not spoken to Debra since weekend - will do so after call and see if there are people she needs helps getting a hold of. Sebastien Bachollet - LH great. Any comments questions? (none). Next meeting #21 Tuesday18 April 2017 1300 AOB Sebastien Bachollet -? (none) Adjourned.

1 0

Notes, recordings and transcript for WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting # 25 | 04 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 4, 2017

April 4, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #25 – 04 April 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/TL-RAw A copy of the agenda and notes may be found below. Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux (MSSI) Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives Projects & Operations Assistant. ICANN – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Email: yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org Cell: +1-310-460-8432 Skype: yvette.guigneaux.icann www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/> [cid:image002.png@01D2ACD1.B5AB4B10] ________________________________ Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #25 04 April 2017 @ 19:00 UTC This meeting will be recorded. Please mute your phone when not speaking by pressing *6 (star 6) *6 will also unmute. Apologies: Paul Rosenzweig, Andreea Brambilla, Avri Doria Agenda: 1. Welcome 2. Review of Agenda (2 minutes) 3. Administration (1 minute) a. Changes to SOIs b. Identify Audio Only and Phone Number Participants 4. Status of Questions to ICANN Legal 5. Review of decisions and action items from last call (2 minutes) a. Decisions – none b. Action Items: - Add Christopher Wilkinson to Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team (GSS/Staff) (completed) - Create email address/list for Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team (Staff) (completed) - Create email address/list for Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team (Staff) (completed) 6. Update on Questionnaire (2 minutes) a. No new submissions 7. Review of ICANN’s past and current litigation a. Pool.com (MW) b. Updated reviews (MW) 8. Review of Working Method (30 minutes) a. Current approach to work b. Issues and Concerns 9. AOB 10. Next meeting 11 April 1300UTC 11. Adjourned Notes (includes relevant text from chat): 1. Welcome Greg is running a few minutes late, the call will start momentarily. 2. Review of Agenda No changes to agenda. 3. Administration a. Changes to SOIs No changes to SOIs. b. Identify Audio Only and Phone Number Participants Kavouss Arasteh will be out of the AC room for the last 10 min of the call. Seun Ojedeji on audio. 4. Status of Questions to ICANN Legal Bernie - Sam is actively working on this request. Staff will follow-up this week. 5. Review of decisions and action items from last call a. Decisions: none b. Action Items: - Add Christopher Wilkinson to Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team (GSS/Staff) (completed) - Create email address/list for Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team (Staff) (completed) - Create email address/list for Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team (Staff) (completed) 6. Update on Questionnaire a. No new submissions Greg - It's not too late to promote the questionnaire or respond to the questionnaire. 7. Review of ICANN’s past and current litigation David McAuley - started working on namespace case. Bernie - sign up sheet can be found at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oo9oDJuuxFz1UUNaBfHeor7HPhJ5XcRHFTq3hjR…<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> a. Pool.com (MW) Mathieu Weill (MW) presented review of pool.com litigation. Greg - Seun had some comments on the mailing list earlier today, but is not connected right now. David McAuley - I take it this case was not appealed? MW - no, it was dropped. Greg - was it dropped because the parties settled? MW - I think there was a settlement, but that's my interpretation, there is no mention of that in the case. Kavouss - was the case dropped by the court? what would have happened if it had not been dropped? MW - Ottawa is a city in Ontario, in Canada. I cannot say what would have happened if the case had not been dropped. Greg - the plaintiff must have dropped it, the court would have dismissed it, court cannot drop it, only the plaintiff can. David - I believe this subject is part of the questions that were sent to ICANN Legal. Kavouss - I hope we can find a case outside of the US where the case was not dropped. Greg - that was the only case that was outside of the US, all others listed are in the US. MW - confirming what Greg indicated. That in itself is an interesting finding. Kavouss - could we look into cases where the plaintiff is a non US? Mathieu Weill: Non US Plaintiff are useful to look at indeed. Such as DitAfrica ? Kavouss - do we have cases in countries where ICANN doesn't have offices? Greg - I believe we should get answer to that question from ICANN Legal. b. Updated reviews (MW) 8. Review of Working Method a. Current approach to work Kavouss - the people who raise the concerns that our working methods are not taking us anywhere should attend the calls so we can discuss. We also need answers from ICANN Legal in order to move the work forward. DM - looking at past litigations, and the questionnaire, all this seems to be very sensible and legitimate. Seun - It's not necessarily a complete exercise that we are doing. We are only looking at past experiences. MW - this conversation highlights the need to clarify the various tracks of work that we are currently working on. Past litigations is one, questions to ICANN Legal is another, and the questionnaire is a 3rd. We have been requested to provide an update to the plenary of what we are currently working on, and what the next steps will be. Greg - I don't think that any of the work that we are doing is intended to create the impression that we fill time. We still need to clarify the mandate of the group, but we have taken steps to find the facts. Our working method is to look for issues, and then to find remedies. Seun - yes, but for now we have only been looking for issues in the past, we have not looked into potential issues in the future. Mathieu Weill: Potential issues in the future is a definition of Risks. Greg - looking for potential issues is not part of our mandate. Greg - I will prepare a status of where we are, and will submit it to the mailing list. MW - maybe we could invite the persons who commented on the mailing list to join us in the next subgroup call. Greg - good suggestion, let's do that. b. Issues and Concerns 9. AOB None raised. 10. Next meeting 11 April 1300UTC 11. Adjourned

1 0

Notes, recordings and transcript for Diversity Subgroup Meeting #16 | 31 March 2017
by MSSI Secretariat March 31, 2017

March 31, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Diversity Subgroup Meeting #16 – 31 March 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/1LDRAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux (MSSI) Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives Projects & Operations Assistant. ICANN – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Email: yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org Cell: +1-310-460-8432 Skype: yvette.guigneaux.icann www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/> [id:image001.png@01D28DF5.EF27C2B0] Notes (includes relevant text from chat): 9 Participants at start of call. 1. Roll Call 2. Status of Action Items Fiona Asonga - both completed. Review of participants to the drafting team. Bernard Turcotte – Co-Chairs have made the request to ICANN for interpretation of Diversity meetings. Please note that within a few weeks all CCWG-Accountability meeting will have English captioning at least until the end of June 2017. 3. Work plan with regards to plenary feedback Fiona Asonga - We have been asked to reconsider when we publish the questionnaire by the co-chairs. We should post the questionnaire to receive general input as well as to the SOACs. Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: 42 days for public comments Julie Hammer (SSAC): Could we ask for 42 days, even though not a public comment, recognising that we cannot dictate. avri doria: if we can't impose a date, then any date we suggest should be fine Fiona Asonga - would recommend 42 days for responses to questionnaire. Should we translate? Julia Charvolen: The question came from the LAC region in the GAC. One of the GAC representatives from the LAC region proposed to translate the questionnaire in Spanish. Julia Charvolen: The GAC Leadership asked the question about the questionnaire being translated Amal Al-Saqqaf: I don't think so Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: I always support translations Abdeldjalil Bachar Bong: i think before their answer so their members need to understand the questionnaire Julie Hammer (SSAC): Is it an option to post the English version first and follow up with translations? Abdeldjalil Bachar Bong: in their language (French ...) avri doria: ummm, once we start to translate, one can wonder why discriminate against any language. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: FR ES EN as a min, best if can be 6 UN if possible plus Portuguese Abdeldjalil Bachar Bong: we need to show the diversity that we defend now Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: do remember we are the DIVERSITY WG avri doria: otherwise it can look like we only care about diversity of some non english speakers Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2: yup avri doria: i.e. wee work in parallel? Amal Al-Saqqaf: agree with that but it depends on the plan of the diversity subgroup deadlines avri doria: of course taking a sevral month vaca from diversity work, can work as well. Andreea Brambilla: Agreed, we incorporate responses as they come in. But final responses will be required to confirm status quo, views of SOs/ACs etc Julie Hammer - work in parallel is what we have committed to do and makes sense given timing. Fiona Asonga - any objections/ (none). So the drafting team will clean up the document which will give time to have 3 readings and the readjust the document. Once everyone is comfortable we can send it to the plenary. Bernard Turcotte - Staff can assist with editing the document if the team wishes. 4. A.O.B Fiona Asonga - Any AOB's? (none) Adjourned. Decisions: * Request the Co-Chairs send the questionnaire to the SOACs in English ASAP requesting a response in 42 days. * Request the Co-Chairs publish the questionnaire similarly to the Jurisdiction questionnaire in all the ICANN languages + Portuguese requesting a response in 42 days from the date of publishing. * The Diversity sub-group will not interrupt its work on publishing a draft set of recommendations for June 2017 while the questionnaire is active. Action Items: * Fiona Asonga – to write to Co-Chairs requesting publication of the questionnaire per the decisions on this. * Fiona Asonga – to write to drafting group to clean up current draft to begin work with the objective of completing a first draft for public comment by ICANN59. Diversity meetings to the end of June o Friday 31 March 1900 o Thursday 6 April 1300 o Thursday 13 April 1300 o Thursday 20 April 1300 o Wednesday 26 April 1300 o Thursday 4 May 1300 o Friday 12 May 1300 o Thursday 18 May 1300 o Thursday 25 May 1300 o Thursday 1 June 1300 o Thursday 8 June 1900 o Thursday 15 June 1900 o Thursday 22 June 1900

1 0

Notes, recordings, transcript for CCWG ACCT Plenary Meeting #15 | 29 March 2017
by MSSI Secretariat March 31, 2017

March 31, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Meeting #15 – 29 March 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/0LbRAw A copy of the action items and notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D2AA32.4AC70790] Action items: · Staff to write to plenary list to inquire who is preparing to respond, or knows of people/groups who will, to the Good Faith and Transparency Public Consultations. · Staff to publish SOAC Accountability Draft Recommendation for public consultation summarizing the issues around removing Mutual from MAR in the Announcement. · Diversity sub-group to decide how to proceed with the survey. · Greg Shatan to prepare an update for the next plenary on the Jurisdiction sub-group process, current work approach and progress. Notes: (including relevant portions of chat) 26 Participants at start of call Introduction, update to SOIs, reminder on standards of behavior Thomas Rickert - Now a member of NIC AT advisory Board. Will update SOI. Review of Agenda Kavouss Arateh - Need to reconsider the work of the Jurisdiction group progress and methods at the level of the plenary. Mathieu Weill - propose initial discussion in AOB and prepare a full intervention for the next plenary. Any objections? (none) Avri Doria: One value in Mathieu’s approach is that it allows all the protagonists to show up for the conversation. Avri Doria: but we should have the conversation and not avoid having the discussion Administration Patrick Dodson - We will be turning on captioning for all WS2 calls in the short term as a follow on to the Captioning trial earlier this year. Will consider if we still need the transcription service later on. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): captioning will be a great asset. FIONA ASONGA: + Cheryl, Patrick Leon Sanchez: This is a "yes we can" moment :-) avri doria: captioning is great. will help a lot when attending overlapping meetings. Sebastien Bachollet - any link of captioning with the interpretation request from Diversity? Also on public comment type things the Ombuds team is working with the evaluator who was been interviewing people and will also publish a questionnaire at then end of the week. Patrick Dodson: Sebastien, two different topics, and we are still circulating the official request for interpretation internally. Patrick Dodson: Coordinating with language services and PCST. Mathieu Weill - Action Item - Staff to ask the plenary list if members know of people preparing input for the public comments. Decision – Captioning will be provided for all WS2 meeting including sub-groups. Action Item – Staff to write to plenary list to inquire who is preparing to respond, or knows of people who will, to the Good Faith and Transparency Public Consultations. Legal Committee Update Leon Sachez - Pending is the Jurisdiction questions. Have asked for an update from ICANN legal this week but have yet to receeive a reply. Updates/Presentation from sub-groups SO/AC Accountability - Second Reading Cheryl Langdon-Orr - Thanks to all for the contributions. Steve DelBianco - (presentation of red-line version from the first reading). https://community.icann.org/x/lBWOAw Christopher Wilkinson - Prefer we use Gender Balance - Also want to know what happened to MART. Steve DelBianco - CW - for Diversity we are waiting for the Diversity sub-group to complete their work. as to the MART this is the next part of the topic. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): so it acts as a placeholder for any outcomes of the Diversity WT in our dimensions reference Greg Shatan: We should clarify that SO/AC reviews should also take these best practices into account. Jordan Carter: Steve, I think the way that you've included this and taken the feedback from the plenary on board makes sense. it's probably about as far as can be gone at this point. Kavuss Arasteh - In the Outreach - the membership ranking - what is this? What about REQUIRED at the end? Steve DelBianco - there is no ranking of memberships. We also have not used REQUIRED. Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Kavouss, just did a double check in the doc on "require". I confirm Steve's statement. Steve DelBianco: we can just drop "ranks" from that sentence Farzaneh Badii: I agree with dropping ranks on page 7 Steve DelBianco: on pages 7-8 we recommend that ICANN place these Best Practices in the Policies & Procedures for Reviews Julie Hammer - re MART - remember people wanting to add to this recommendation. I was unware that we were considering bringing back MART which I do not agree with - I think the original recommendation from the group was not objected by that many people. Steve DelBianco - Our original recommendation was that there was no requirement to implement, The new text has it as an option. Izumi Okutani (ASO): I have the same impression as Julie while I was not physically attending the meeting and was attending remotely CW: Julie +1. I am supporting exchange of best practice and mutual transparency. However, mutual accountability could lead to conflicts of interest. Greg Shatan - JH makes a good point - mutual accountability seems to include more that what we are looking at which is just a discussion of areas of mutual accountability. Would suggest not calling a MART but rather a round table on mutual accountability. Julie Hammer (SSAC): +1 Greg. Absolutely agree. Cheryl Langdon-Orr - @GS - we agree as rapporteurs were going to consider changing the nomenclature. Julie Hammer (SSAC): Yes, agree to remove the term MART altogether. Jordan Carter - This is just about putting accountability on the agenda - we can change the name. Sebastien Bachollet - really feel accountability must be mutual. We need this. CW: @ Julie. Now I get it! There is NO WAY SSAC is 'accountbaile' to the other SOAC. I want to see an independent SSAC. avri doria: in fact the notion of mutual accountabilty seems almost a fundamental part of the multistakeholder enterprise. Jordan Carter: if icann's culture would turn a "mutual" approach into unpleasant and unconstructive point scoring, we have to change the culture - starting with a broad based conversation might start that. Kavouss Arasteh - Support SB. Steve DelBianco: True, CW. We can remove "mutual" so that the conversation / roundtable is about sharing experiences with accountability TO THEIR DESIGNATED COMMUNITIES Jordan Carter: CW: but other SOs and ACs can and should be able to quiz SSAC on decisions it makes within ICANN - and vice versa too. Julie Hammer (SSAC): @CW SSAC should be accountable to the Board and the Community for the quality of its advice. Jordan Carter: Doesn't in the slightest compromise its independence. Julie Hammer (SSAC): @Jordan Yes, agree. Cheryl Langdon-Orr - we will take this back to the group for a look at the nomenclature. Julie Hammer (SSAC): @Jordan Yes, agree. Steve DelBianco: and we are dropping the word Ranks. avri doria: is it just an issue of nomenclature? Jordan Carter: Avri: my sense is that people don't want anyone questioning their decisions avri doria: i dis not hear a 'just nomenclature' discussion Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): that's part of it Avri Jordan Carter: I heard that that echoes in ICANN's current culture in a threatening way avri doria: Jordan, that may be the case. we would all prefer to be totally autonomous without any accountabilty. Wolfgang: Part of the Board Accountability discussion was the option to spill the board or to remove individual board directors. My question is did you discuss procedures how to remove individual council or committee members? avri doria: accountabilty to the whole. avri doria: Wolfgang< i do not beleive removing council members of other reps was discussed. Jordan Carter: I think this sub-group decided not to apply those powers to SO and AC or subgroups Thomas Rickert - Looking to remove MUTUAL and RANKING. With those two changes in mind any objections to accepting this as a second reading? Sebastien Bachollet - Do not agree. avri doria: i will support sebatien on this Thomas Rickert - given there are no other objections except AD and KA. As such we will consider this accepted for a second reading. Would invite those people to put in a comment in the public comment on this document. Sebastien Bachollet - do not agree and should not go to public comment. Thomas Rickert - SB this is not our process where only a minority object blocks publication. This has followed our process and been accepted per that process. Steve DelBianco - Am confident the sub-group would accept dropping MUTUAL. So there is no purpose in the SB request as the sub-group was never comfortable recommending the MART. Avri Doria - will join SB that we need mutual accountability. Do not agree we take out MUTUAL (procedural POV). If we want to edit it it needs to go back to the group. Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Thomas, I think there has been ample discussion in the subgroup as well as in the plenary at this point. Julie Hammer (SSAC): Publishing this document and seeking the reactions of the SO/AC Chartering Organisations on this issue would be helpful. Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Support your proposed way forward. John Laprise: +1 Avri & Sebastien Cheryl Langdon-Orr - We could publish as is. Izumi Okutani (ASO): I agree with the suggested way forward by Cheryl and Thomas. Avri's comment on bringining to attention makes sense Thomas Rickert - Agree with AD - so recommend we make clear in the public consultation about the discussion around Mutual. Any objections? (1 SB). Accepted as a second reading. So not full consensus but consensus. Sebastien Bachollet - I did put up a red cross and oppose strongly. Cheryl Langdon-Orr - disagree with SDB on interpretation. Thomas Rickert - I do not think this document needs to go back to the sub-team as there are only two edits - remove RANK and Mutual. Additionally in the announcement we will clearly mention that there was a debate on having the word Mutual. Do not see a need for revision of the sub-team. avri doria: I vote against Steve's understanding. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): happy to support your way forward Thomas Izumi Okutani (ASO): + 1 Cheryl avri doria: i do not support. but give up. for today. Greg Shatan: There can be two concepts of mutual accountability: (1) Each SO/AC to each other SO/AC (multiple bilateral accountabiloity) or (2 avri doria: i support the second option as well Lori Schulman: Agree with Greg and Avir Diversity questionnaire - second reading - Fiona Asonga - (Presentation of edited document - sound issues) Leon Sanchez - (presentation of document) objections to this being a successful second reading? (none). Julie Hammer (SSAC): This version incorporates all the suggestions and feedback from the Plenary in CPH. avri doria: there was not agreement on tis in the subgroup as far as i know. what good is the report before the questionnaire? Renata Aquino Ribeiro: +1 FIONA ASONGA 2: We did as a subgroup discuss and agree to proceed with the questionnaire first Renata Aquino Ribeiro: option 1 avri doria: i asume we want the questionnaire answered. Renata Aquino Ribeiro: publish the questionnaire to get answers FIONA ASONGA 2: The questionnaire needs to be answered to guide us on the recommendations Julie Hammer (SSAC): Sorry Bernie, I missed that subtle difference. FIONA ASONGA 2: I would seek advise on what the minimun period for public comments is as required within ICANN Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: 42 days Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: BUt request to SO/AC take 2 to 3 months Renata Aquino Ribeiro: how long did the so/ac questionnaire take? Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: See precedent of SO/AC Acct Renata Aquino Ribeiro: our questionnnaire has 1/3 the size FIONA ASONGA 2: Ok then that means we will just have to go out with some draft recomendations Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: That was the rationale in Copenhagen Renata Aquino Ribeiro: sorry Leon didn't get that FIONA ASONGA 2: The challenge is that the recommendations will not have been though t through in view of the responses Mathieu Weill - We have accepted the questionnaire at the second reading and would ask the sub-group to consider how to proceed with it taking into account the timelines. FIONA ASONGA 2: The Action Item for the diversity group is acceptable Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Thanks Fiona Next Plenary AOB Mathieu Weill - onto AOB. Kavouss Arasteh - (no audio) Mathieu Weill - would GS be prepared to give an update on the progress and the workplan at the next plenary? Action Item. Greg Shatan - agree. Mathieu Weill - adjourned. Adjournment Decisions: Captioning service will be provided for all WS2 meeting ASAP SOAC Accountability draft recommendations successfully completed second reading and should be published for public consultation with the following conditions: Remove RANK and Mutual (in MAR) Public Consultation Announcement should summarize the issues around removing Mutual from MAR. Diversity Questionnaire successfully completed second reading. The Diversity sub-group will consider at its next meeting how to proceed with this.

1 0

Notes, recordings and transcript for WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting # 24 | 28 March 2017
by MSSI Secretariat March 30, 2017

March 30, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #24 – 28 March 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/g67RAw A copy of the action items and notes may be found below. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D2A969.FB5CAA20] Action Items: · Staff-GS – Add Christopher Wilkinson to Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team · Staff to create email address for Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team · Staff-GS To send doodle poll to arrange for a meeting of the Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team Notes (includes relevant text from chat): 13 Participants at start of call 1. Welcome 2. Review of Agenda Greg Shatan - (no objections) 3. Administration a) Changes to SOIs (none) b) Questions to ICANN Legal – Status (awaiting response) 4. Questionnaire Update a) Status of current responses – no new responses b) Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team i) Responsibilities (1) Updating the Subgroup on new responses and their status at each meeting (2) Proposing an evaluation framework for responses (a) Responses received will help guide creation of evaluation framework Christopher Wilkinson - I responded but my name does not seem to have been accepted. Greg Shatan - will add. (b) To be approved by the Subgroup ii) Mail list to be created iii) Meeting to be scheduled – Doodle poll to follow 5. Review of ICANN’s Past and Current Litigation a) Review of Sign-up sheet (document) Greg Shatan - (no changes) b) Review of Summary Sheet (document) c) Review of Summaries i) Verisign, Inc. v. ICANN V2 – MW Mathieu Weill - (presentation of summary sheet). Did not feel comfortable filling in the "choice of law/gov. law" field. Becky Burr - ICANN used to put in a choice of law claue in its contracts which it does not do anymore. ii) State of AZ vs NTIA V2 - MW Mathieu Weill - (presentation of summary sheet). Did not feel comfortable filling in the "choice of law/gov. law" field. Greg Shatan - did the court rule on the jurisdiction argument (MW - no mention of it). Any questions? (none). iii) Ben Haim v. Iran – MW Mathieu Weill - (presentation of summary sheet). Did not feel comfortable filling in the "choice of law/gov. law" field. Becky Burr: there was a long discussion in the cases regarding which attachment law (state) applied Becky Burr: DC or California Mathieu Weill: I'll check the case and extract the relevant parts Becky Burr: not WOULD have, but potentially could have Becky Burr: because the plaintiffs sought the attachment in DC David McAuley (RySG): just getting wind of this discussion - in the case on screen I think coutrt applied DC law which is a tad unusual on attachment Becky Burr: so the plaintiff controlled here Becky Burr: yes, David, you and I are on the same wavelength Greg Shatan - should we add a field to the form about alternate jurisdictions. Mathieu Weill - Do not think we should theorize about this - we just do our analysis and then look at statistics they yield. Becky Burr: correct Mattieu David McAuley (RySG): good point @Mathieu Greg Shatan - Agree we should not do studies beyond what is provided in the materials. 6. AOB Greg Shatan - (none) 7. Adjourn Greg Shatan - Adjourned. Decisions (none)

1 0

Apology..
by Jordan Carter March 30, 2017

March 30, 2017

Hi all I seem through user error of my calendar to have accidentally invited some group of CCWG participants to a dinner tonight. My apologies for the mistake :( Best Jordan -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive, InternetNZ +64-21-442-649 | jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz Sent on the run, apologies for brevity

3 4