- Accountability-Cross-Community

CCWG mailing list summary, 6-12 February
by Adam Peake Feb. 23, 2015

Feb. 23, 2015

Hi Everyone, Summary of the mailing list for 6-12 February attached. This had been sent to the advisors Please let Alice Jansen (alice.jansen(a)icann.org) and me know if you have any comments. Best, Adam

1 0

Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Additional Document for discussion
by Burr, Becky Feb. 23, 2015

Feb. 23, 2015

I have made a quick attempt to articulate the standard of behavior against which ICANN might be measured for accountability purposes. It roughly corresponds to the Mission Statement and Core Values in the ICANN bylaws today, but has some additions that and modifications consistent with various suggestions that I’ve heard from the group. If I missed your suggestion, please accept my apologies. This is just to start the discussion. J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006 Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr(a)neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz From: Alice Jansen <alice.jansen(a)icann.org<mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org>> Date: Monday, February 9, 2015 at 4:38 PM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Revised agenda - Meeting #11 Dear all, In anticipation of your meeting #11, please find attached a revised agenda. Thanks Best regards Alice

7 11

one world trust report - summary
by Adam Peake Feb. 21, 2015

Feb. 21, 2015

Hi everyone. Attached is a summary of a One World Trust report "ICANN Accountability Benchmarks and Metrics". The full report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/benchmarks-consultancy-28feb14 -en.pdf> was sent to the list a few weeks ago, and there were a couple of questions recently. Summary produced by Larisa Gurnick of ICANN's strategic initiatives team. Jan Scholte was involved with OWT's work. I hope the summary's useful, the report proposed an accountability framework and several suggestions for improving ICANN accountability. Larisa introduces these and mentions a few recommended improvements. Best, Adam

1 0

ARTICLE OF INTEREST .ram, Chrysler and India
by Carrie Devorah Feb. 20, 2015

Feb. 20, 2015

http://www.techpolicydaily.com/internet/domain-names-politics-chrysler-migh… Sincerely CARRIE Devorah 562 688 2883 Founder THE CENTER FOR COPYRIGHTS INTEGRITY www.centerforcopyrightintegrity.com Where ARTS, IP, ID, IT and ENFORCEMENT Come Together In One Voice Against Online Theft Of Content and Commerce https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I93F73UYmsw&feature=youtu.be CCIA : Profiler : trained MPI : LACBA-DRS : CA-BSIS Actively built the 1st discrete site crime analysis lab on a campus in North America *COFFEE @ CLOCKERs "A Sense Of Place"* Licensor http://ybltv.com/?p=306 DISCLAIMER : With the continuing crossing and interfacing of platforms both on & off line both with & without our knowledge nor approval to note nothing sent over the Internet anymore is ever private nor should be presumed to be so. If it is that much of a secret, say nothing. If you must? Take a lesson from our military- hand write the note, chew then swallow

1 0

Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for CCWG ACCT WP1 18 February
by Brenda Brewer Feb. 20, 2015

Feb. 20, 2015

Dear All, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the WP1 Meeting #1 18 February will be available here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52889645 Action Items ACTION ITEM: Jordan to touch base with Becky to OK lists ACTION ITEM: Jordan to discuss with coChairs and WP2 ACTION ITEM: Volunteers to provide input on how templates work ACTION ITEM: Staff to put template into google doc ACTION ITEM: Staff to circulate Wiki tutorials to CCWG Notes 1. Scope of this Working Party, WP1 Triggered / Non-triggered were suggested by CoChairs in Singapore. WP1 is non-triggered group WP1-WP2 coordination needed on triggered / non-triggered Move AoC reviews to Bylaws to make them non-triggered Triggered by whom? events, individuals ACTION ITEM Jordan to touch base with Becky to OK lists 2. Work Plan and Working Methods Volunteers needed to populate templates Powers and mechanisms are different - distinction needs to be described - suggestion to have name of the power listed in title, instead of mechanism ACTION ITEM Jordan to discuss with coChairs and WP2 Flexibility in filling out templates - not requirement to have all of the sections filled out VOLUNTEERS Roelof - 1 A,B,C Steve - 2 A,B,C,E Matthew - 2 A,B,C,D,E & 5A Fiona - 2 A,B,C,D,E Keith - Jonathan - Editor Keith - 5 A,B Kavouss - 2A,B,C 5B-2 ACTION ITEM Volunteers to provide input on how templates work ACTION ITEM Staff to put template into google doc ACTION: Staff to circulate Wiki tutorials to CCWG END Best regards, Brenda

4 3

Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG list summary, Jan 30 to Feb 5
by Mr R.T. Daniel Feb. 20, 2015

Feb. 20, 2015

Thinking out loud. So is there any mileage in having an icann A & icann B. "A" board = public interest & contract co. "B" board private non profit implementing Board A 's ..policy frameworks....etc...etc.. Board B answerable to board A? RD Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Hi,IamnotsureigetthedistinctionaboutICANNbeingprivateorganisation,doesitmeanthereisalsoproblemwithallRIRthataresetupasanot-for-profitorganisationlikeICANN.Ithinkthefactorsyouindicateaselementsofmultistakeholderismareadequatelycoveredwithinthepublicinterestphrase.Whatmattersmostforanon-legalindividuallikemeisthatialwayshavetheopportunitytoparticipateinthepolicydevelopmentprocessthatwoulddeterminehowigetservedbyICANN.Solongasigetthat,myrightsarecoveredandmultistakeholderismwillbefelttobeinaction.Regards OnThu,Feb19,2015at5:16PM,RobinGrossrobin@ipjustice.orgwrote:TheproblemisthatICANNisaprivatecorporationanditisengaginginpublicgovernancefunctions. Thequasipublic-privatestructurecreatesachallengebecauseifitwereatraditionalgovernment,itwouldberequiredtorespecthumanrightsintheperformanceofpublicgovernancefunctions,andsomearguethatbecauseitisaprivatecorporationithasnoobligationtorespectrights(yearsagoICANNslawyersarguedinthexxxcasethat,asacontracteetotheUSGovt,itwasobligatedtoprotectfreeexpression). Sothetraditionalframeworkbreaksdownbecausewevegotaprivatecorporationundertakingpublicgovernancefunctions,butwithoutthetraditionalprotections(respectinghumanrights)intheperformanceofthosepublicfunctions. Ifthisholeisnotplugged,themulti-stakeholdermodelisinadequateforInternetgovernance. Out-sourcingpublicgovernancefunctionstoprivatecorporationsisfine,solongaswedontlosetheprotectionsaffordedbypublicgovernanceinstitutions. IfthereisnodutytoprotectfreeexpressionandprivacybythoseorganizationswhosetpoliciesgoverningtheInternet,wevetakenastep-backwardwithmulti-stakholderism,althoughitisnottoolatetofix. Atitscore,whatImarguinghereisthatICANNshouldrespectfreespeech,privacy,anddueprocessrightsinitscarryingoutofitspublicgovernancefunctions,sowhenICANNmakesapolicy,itdoesntderogatefromthefundamentalrightsaffordedtoInternetusersintraditionalgovernanceinstitutions. IfICANNwantstoengageinpublicgovernancefunctions,itmustacceptpublicgovernanceresponsibilities.Best,RobinOnFeb18,2015,at4:36PM,GregShatanwrote:Carlos:Nobodysreducinganything.Firstoff,theFirstAmendmentisreallyirrelevanttothisdiscussion,aswonderfulasitis. Itpreventsthefederal governmentfrommakinglawsabridgingfreedomofspeech,freedomofthepress,freedomofassemblyorrespectinganestablishmentofreligion. WearenottalkingaboutactionsoftheU.S.governmenthere,andICANNhasneverbeenconsideredapartoftheU.S.government. TheFirstAmendmentdoesnotapplytoprivateentities. SotheFirstAmendmentreallyhasnothingtodowiththisconversation,otherthantoconfuseit.ICANN,asaprivateentity,hasneverbeensubjecttotheFirstAmendment,sonothingschanginginthatregard. Furthermore,itsinaccurate,misleadingandunhelpfultorefertothisasaprivatization. TheprivatizationoftheInternet,ifsuchathingcaneverbesaidtohaveoccurred,occurreddecadesago. ThestewardshipoftheUSgovernment,whilebroaderthantheIANAFunctionsthatareatthecoreofthatstewardship,neverextendedinanywaytoapplyingFirstAmendmentprotectionsorprohibitionstoICANNsaction,muchlessmakingICANNanarmofthestate.Also,nothingschangingwithregardtoICANNsobligationtoperforminthepublicinterest. ICANNspublicinterestobligationsdomakeitdifferentfromprivatefor-profitentities. AdoptingaCorporateSocialResponsibilityprogramandpolicywouldnotinanywaydiminishorreplaceICANNspublicinterestobligations. Rather,CSRpolicieswouldcomplementandactasa(non-exclusive)manifestationofICANNscommitmenttothepublicinterest. A

5 5

United States Senate Hearings on "Preserving the Multistakeholder Model of Internet Governance"
by Greg Shatan Feb. 19, 2015

Feb. 19, 2015

Hearings have now been announced for February 25. Those announced as testifying are Fadi Chehade, Larry Strickling and David Gross (partner in the law firm of Wiley Rein & Fielding and ex-Department of State). http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id… Greg Shatan

1 0

Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG list summary, Jan 30 to Feb 5
by Edward Morris Feb. 19, 2015

Feb. 19, 2015

I'm a bit confused Tijani. First, you said you didn't remember the suggestion and now you state the suggestion had no support. As I wasn't able to be in Frankfurt I would appreciate clarification of the status of this worthy idea. I'm personally not a big fan of the generic term "public interest", finding that in practice "public interest" usually morphs into "personal interest": that is, "the public it is I". I realise that creation of a consensus definition of the public interest is called for in the draft 5 year OP but I do find Robin's idea to be worthy of discussion by the wider WG and thank staff for including it in the summary document. Best, Ed Sent from my iPad > On Feb 17, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa(a)fmai.org.tn> wrote: > > Yes you did in Frankfurt, and there was no support to your suggestion. > > The “public interest” or the “benefit of the public, not just in the interests of a particular set of stakeholders” had a large support as part of the “CCWG Accountability – Problem definition” document (purposes of ICANN’s accountability, d.) > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Tijani BEN JEMAA > Executive Director > Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) > Phone: + 216 41 649 605 > Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 > Fax: + 216 70 853 376 > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > De : Robin Gross [mailto:robin@ipjustice.org] > Envoyé : mardi 17 février 2015 18:40 > À : Tijani BEN JEMAA > Cc : 'Adam Peake'; 'Accountability Cross Community' > Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG list summary, Jan 30 to Feb 5 > > Yes, I made this suggestion. > > Thanks, > Robin > > > On Feb 16, 2015, at 3:54 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote: > > > Dear Adam, > > I may have missed some of the mails exchanged but I don’t remember that it was suggested that the public interest be replaced by human rights and internet freedom. > > Tijani > > > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Adam Peake > Envoyé : lundi 16 février 2015 18:45 > À : Accountability Cross Community > Objet : [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG list summary, Jan 30 to Feb 5 > > Apologies for the delay sending this summary. It was sent to the advisors last week. > > Best, > > Adam > > > > > > > <~WRD000.jpg> > Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection Antivirus avast! est active. > > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > > > > > Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection Antivirus avast! est active. > > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

21 37

FW: NTIA blog post: Stakeholders Continue Historic Work on Internet DNS Transition at ICANN Singapore Meeting
by Paul Rosenzweig Feb. 19, 2015

Feb. 19, 2015

See below for NTIA take on ICANN52 Paul **NOTE: OUR NEW ADDRESS -- EFFECTIVE 12/15/14 *** 509 C St. NE Washington, DC 20002 Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 Skype: +1 (202) 738-1739 or paul.rosenzweig1066 -----Original Message----- From: Joelle Tessler [mailto:JTessler@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:46 AM To: Joelle Tessler Subject: NTIA blog post: Stakeholders Continue Historic Work on Internet DNS Transition at ICANN Singapore Meeting Stakeholders Continue Historic Work on Internet DNS Transition at ICANN Singapore Meeting February 19, 2015 by Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2015/stakeholders-continue-historic-work-intern et-dns-transition-icann-singapore-meeting Last week, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) held its 52nd meeting in Singapore, where the global multistakeholder community continued progress on a proposal to transition the United States role related to the Internet Domain Name System. I was pleased to see the amount of energy and professionalism exhibited by the nearly 1800 participants at the ICANN meeting. The Internet's stakeholders are driving this transition and are demonstrating that businesses, technical experts, and civil society groups are best equipped to set the future direction of the Internet. Under this multistakeholder model, no one party can control the Internet or impose its will. And that's what's enabled the Internet to flourish and evolve into this global medium that has torn down barriers to free speech and fueled economic growth and innovation. It is so important that we get this transition right. If it doesn't take place, we will embolden authoritarian regimes to seek greater government control of the Internet or to threaten to fragment the Internet, which would result in a global patchwork of regulations and rules that stifle the free flow of information. Now that we are nearing the one-year anniversary of our announcement, it is important to take stock of where this transition process stands. Stakeholders have organized two major work streams to develop the overall plan: one group is focused on the specifics of the IANA functions and the second is addressing questions of the overall accountability of ICANN to the global community of Internet stakeholders. In the first track, the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG), representing more than a dozen Internet stakeholder communities, is developing proposals for each of the three primary IANA functions - protocol parameters, numbering, and domain names. Two of the three stakeholder groups have already finished their draft proposals: the Internet Engineering Task Force, which is shepherding the protocol parameter proposal, and the five Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), which worked collaboratively in developing the numbering proposal. The third group, the ICANN Cross Community Working Group (CWG) on the naming related functions, continues to deliberate on how best to assure effective and accountable oversight of these naming functions in NTIA's absence. Once a consolidated proposal has achieved broad community support, the ICG will transmit the final proposal to the ICANN Board for submission to NTIA. In the second track, stakeholders are working on a proposal to enhance ICANN's accountability to the global Internet community in the absence of the contractual relationship with NTIA. While it started later than the IANA transition process, the Accountability working group is making considerable progress. It's important that the two tracks remain in sync. We will only consider a coordinated and complete transition plan. While in Singapore, I participated in meetings and discussions with ICANN, other governments and the stakeholder community with respect to the transition. NTIA also continued to represent the U. S. at the meetings of ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee. In these discussions, I posed several questions for stakeholders to consider. I want to ensure that any proposal developed by the stakeholder community meets the conditions NTIA outlined last March, including: supporting and enhancing the multistakeholder model; maintaining the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet Domain Name System; meeting the needs and expectation of the global customers and partners of the IANA services; and maintaining the openness of the Internet. In addition, I want to ensure that our role is not replaced by a government or intergovernmental organization. As both groups continue their work, any new process proposed must be tested to ensure that it actually works. The results will help inform our review of the final transition proposal. As for timing, both groups are aiming to deliver a transition plan to us in the summer. While September 2015 has been a target date, because that is when the base period of our contract with ICANN expires, we have the flexibility to extend the contract if the community needs more time to develop the best plan possible. The Internet community is undertaking truly historic work at a pivotal moment in time. I thank them for their tireless dedication to this effort. The outcome of this process will impact the way the Internet is governed for years to come. Joelle Tessler Manager of Stakeholder Relations and Outreach National Telecommunications and Information Administration U.S. Department of Commerce jtessler(a)ntia.doc.gov

2 1

Next f2f CCWG
by Kavouss Arasteh Feb. 18, 2015

Feb. 18, 2015

Dear Co -Chairs, Dear All, I have humbly and respectfully informed you that I am ties up in anotzher meeting from 23 March-023 April, May I request you to kindly consider an alternative date . I really wish to attend the meeting if you kindly make it possible to do so Regards Kavouss

1 0