Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations
Thanks Jorge, very helpful. But that test acts as a limitation on fair use exceptions doesn’t it? "Members shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rights holder.” 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@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz On 6/2/15, 2:47 PM, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Well, you don't have an internationally agreed standard of fair use, but you have the three-step-test (Berne Convention, TRIPS...)
Regards
Jorge
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Burr, Becky Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Juni 2015 20:17 An: Robin Gross; Bruce Tonkin; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Community Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations
We are addressing expression (mission, commitments, core values) and due process (commitments and core values)
Is there an internationally recognized human right of fair use and how broad is it?
Privacy is my primary day job. To the extent there is an internationally recognized right to privacy, I believe it is stated in the International Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights as follows: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.² Sovereign governments determine what is unlawful in their jurisdiction, and I¹m not sure ICANN is in a position to interpret and apply all of the privacy laws around the world. Presumably, ICANN¹s role would be to avoid arbitrary interference with privacy rights? I don¹t think ICANN is entitled to be arbitrary about most anything
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@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
On 6/1/15, 10:17 PM, "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Thanks, Bruce. I do believe that is the right approach and suggest that we focus on the following Internet users' fundamental freedoms: 1. Freedom of expression including fair use rights 2. Privacy rights 3. Due process rights
Thank you, Robin
On Jun 1, 2015, at 7:12 PM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
Hello Avri,
Just wanted to say how impressed I was to hear several of our advisers pointing out that the work we had done to date had not emphasized Human Rights in our principles. And that it was important we did so.
Perhaps it could be more explicit in our core values?
I assume you are not talking so much about the right to food and shelter, or no-one should be a slave etc (part from perhaps the volunteers at ICANN that might feel that way at times :-)) - but more specifically you are talking about the right to freedom of speech etc. ie it would be useful to pull out the sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that are relevant to ICANN's narrow mission.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDAL C_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0WWJ inx8e-LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2ZlsCb 4&e=
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_ listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lU Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0WWJinx8e- LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2ZlsCb4&e=
That's a very good point, really, but explanations on this could be very lengthy. Traditionally, the three-step-test has been seen as a sort of limit to fair use provisions (US and similar jurisdictions) as well as for specific exceptions and limitations (civil law countries) - as a ceiling to such provisions (which was only agreed in the 1960's if my recollection is right). However, there are differing interpretations which see the test also as a more "empowering" provision, also enabling new interpretations of existing limitations in light of societal change... Jorge -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Burr, Becky [mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz] Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Juni 2015 20:58 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM; robin@ipjustice.org; Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Betreff: Re: AW: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations Thanks Jorge, very helpful. But that test acts as a limitation on fair use exceptions doesn't it? "Members shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rights holder." 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@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz On 6/2/15, 2:47 PM, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Well, you don't have an internationally agreed standard of fair use, but you have the three-step-test (Berne Convention, TRIPS...)
Regards
Jorge
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Burr, Becky Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Juni 2015 20:17 An: Robin Gross; Bruce Tonkin; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Community Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations
We are addressing expression (mission, commitments, core values) and due process (commitments and core values)
Is there an internationally recognized human right of fair use and how broad is it?
Privacy is my primary day job. To the extent there is an internationally recognized right to privacy, I believe it is stated in the International Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights as follows: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.² Sovereign governments determine what is unlawful in their jurisdiction, and I¹m not sure ICANN is in a position to interpret and apply all of the privacy laws around the world. Presumably, ICANN¹s role would be to avoid arbitrary interference with privacy rights? I don¹t think ICANN is entitled to be arbitrary about most anything
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@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
On 6/1/15, 10:17 PM, "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Thanks, Bruce. I do believe that is the right approach and suggest that we focus on the following Internet users' fundamental freedoms: 1. Freedom of expression including fair use rights 2. Privacy rights 3. Due process rights
Thank you, Robin
On Jun 1, 2015, at 7:12 PM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
Hello Avri,
Just wanted to say how impressed I was to hear several of our advisers pointing out that the work we had done to date had not emphasized Human Rights in our principles. And that it was important we did so.
Perhaps it could be more explicit in our core values?
I assume you are not talking so much about the right to food and shelter, or no-one should be a slave etc (part from perhaps the volunteers at ICANN that might feel that way at times :-)) - but more specifically you are talking about the right to freedom of speech etc. ie it would be useful to pull out the sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that are relevant to ICANN's narrow mission.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mai lma n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETe DAL C_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0 WWJ inx8e-LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2Zl sCb 4&e=
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailm an_ listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC _lU Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0WWJinx 8e- LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2ZlsCb4&e=
I realize I am coming in late to this conversation but I believe Becky is correct. Of perhaps more relevance, there is no "fair use right" in the international norms applicable to copyright law. There are obligations to recognize certain exclusive rights in national laws, and permission (but no obligation) for those national laws to recognize exception and limitations to those rights, within the boundaries of the 3-step test that Jorge refers to and that Becky quotes. Steve Metalitz From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 3:03 PM To: Becky.Burr@neustar.biz; robin@ipjustice.org; Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations That's a very good point, really, but explanations on this could be very lengthy. Traditionally, the three-step-test has been seen as a sort of limit to fair use provisions (US and similar jurisdictions) as well as for specific exceptions and limitations (civil law countries) - as a ceiling to such provisions (which was only agreed in the 1960's if my recollection is right). However, there are differing interpretations which see the test also as a more "empowering" provision, also enabling new interpretations of existing limitations in light of societal change... Jorge -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Burr, Becky [mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz] Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Juni 2015 20:58 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM; robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>; Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au<mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Betreff: Re: AW: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations Thanks Jorge, very helpful. But that test acts as a limitation on fair use exceptions doesn't it? "Members shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rights holder." 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@neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz> On 6/2/15, 2:47 PM, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
Well, you don't have an internationally agreed standard of fair use, but you have the three-step-test (Berne Convention, TRIPS...)
Regards
Jorge
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Burr, Becky Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Juni 2015 20:17 An: Robin Gross; Bruce Tonkin; accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Community Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations
We are addressing expression (mission, commitments, core values) and due process (commitments and core values)
Is there an internationally recognized human right of fair use and how broad is it?
Privacy is my primary day job. To the extent there is an internationally recognized right to privacy, I believe it is stated in the International Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights as follows: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.² Sovereign governments determine what is unlawful in their jurisdiction, and I¹m not sure ICANN is in a position to interpret and apply all of the privacy laws around the world. Presumably, ICANN¹s role would be to avoid arbitrary interference with privacy rights? I don¹t think ICANN is entitled to be arbitrary about most anything
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@neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz>
On 6/1/15, 10:17 PM, "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote:
Thanks, Bruce. I do believe that is the right approach and suggest that we focus on the following Internet users' fundamental freedoms: 1. Freedom of expression including fair use rights 2. Privacy rights 3. Due process rights
Thank you, Robin
On Jun 1, 2015, at 7:12 PM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
Hello Avri,
Just wanted to say how impressed I was to hear several of our advisers pointing out that the work we had done to date had not emphasized Human Rights in our principles. And that it was important we did so.
Perhaps it could be more explicit in our core values?
I assume you are not talking so much about the right to food and shelter, or no-one should be a slave etc (part from perhaps the volunteers at ICANN that might feel that way at times :-)) - but more specifically you are talking about the right to freedom of speech etc. ie it would be useful to pull out the sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that are relevant to ICANN's narrow mission.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mai<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mai> lma n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETe DAL C_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0 WWJ inx8e-LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2Zl sCb 4&e=
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailm<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailm> an_ listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC _lU Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0WWJinx 8e- LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2ZlsCb4&e=
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>
Highest courts have held fair use is the breathing space that allows IPR laws to exist without conflicting with freedom of expression guarantees. So fair use is unquestionably rooted in free expression, which certainly is a well accepted human right (UNDHR Art. 19). Albeit like every right, there are some differences between jurisdictions in how the concept is put in practice - hence the 3-step test, attempting to harmonize that some extent. Thanks, Robin On Jun 2, 2015, at 12:12 PM, Metalitz, Steven wrote:
I realize I am coming in late to this conversation but I believe Becky is correct. Of perhaps more relevance, there is no “fair use right” in the international norms applicable to copyright law. There are obligations to recognize certain exclusive rights in national laws, and permission (but no obligation) for those national laws to recognize exception and limitations to those rights, within the boundaries of the 3-step test that Jorge refers to and that Becky quotes.
Steve Metalitz
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 3:03 PM To: Becky.Burr@neustar.biz; robin@ipjustice.org; Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations
That's a very good point, really, but explanations on this could be very lengthy. Traditionally, the three-step-test has been seen as a sort of limit to fair use provisions (US and similar jurisdictions) as well as for specific exceptions and limitations (civil law countries) - as a ceiling to such provisions (which was only agreed in the 1960's if my recollection is right). However, there are differing interpretations which see the test also as a more "empowering" provision, also enabling new interpretations of existing limitations in light of societal change...
Jorge
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Burr, Becky [mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz] Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Juni 2015 20:58 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM; robin@ipjustice.org; Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Betreff: Re: AW: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations
Thanks Jorge, very helpful. But that test acts as a limitation on fair use exceptions doesn't it? "Members shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rights holder."
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@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
On 6/2/15, 2:47 PM, "Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch" <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote:
Well, you don't have an internationally agreed standard of fair use, but you have the three-step-test (Berne Convention, TRIPS...)
Regards
Jorge
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Burr, Becky Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Juni 2015 20:17 An: Robin Gross; Bruce Tonkin; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Community Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Speaking of our Adviser recommendations
We are addressing expression (mission, commitments, core values) and due process (commitments and core values)
Is there an internationally recognized human right of fair use and how broad is it?
Privacy is my primary day job. To the extent there is an internationally recognized right to privacy, I believe it is stated in the International Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights as follows: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.² Sovereign governments determine what is unlawful in their jurisdiction, and I¹m not sure ICANN is in a position to interpret and apply all of the privacy laws around the world. Presumably, ICANN¹s role would be to avoid arbitrary interference with privacy rights? I don¹t think ICANN is entitled to be arbitrary about most anything
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@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
On 6/1/15, 10:17 PM, "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Thanks, Bruce. I do believe that is the right approach and suggest that we focus on the following Internet users' fundamental freedoms: 1. Freedom of expression including fair use rights 2. Privacy rights 3. Due process rights
Thank you, Robin
On Jun 1, 2015, at 7:12 PM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
Hello Avri,
Just wanted to say how impressed I was to hear several of our advisers pointing out that the work we had done to date had not emphasized Human Rights in our principles. And that it was important we did so.
Perhaps it could be more explicit in our core values?
I assume you are not talking so much about the right to food and shelter, or no-one should be a slave etc (part from perhaps the volunteers at ICANN that might feel that way at times :-)) - but more specifically you are talking about the right to freedom of speech etc. ie it would be useful to pull out the sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that are relevant to ICANN's narrow mission.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mai lma n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETe DAL C_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0 WWJ inx8e-LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2Zl sCb 4&e=
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailm an_ listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC _lU Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=HhaGJehrIODY0WWJinx 8e- LPs1vlp-6Xa53onTt-Cz0&s=A1wAZYxds7WUrJ--53NVlGnSmlkCiVrlSvpr2ZlsCb4&e=
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
participants (4)
-
Burr, Becky -
Jorge.Cancio＠bakom.admin.ch -
Metalitz, Steven -
Robin Gross