Hello Kavouss, Sébastien’s language is offered as a dissenting opinion. Best, Thomas

Am 01.08.2015 um 06:19 schrieb Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>:

I oppose to that wrong statement as these are four distinct communities. Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

On 1 Aug 2015, at 02:16, Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com <mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com>> wrote:

...

Thanks Bernard, Following Thomas suggestion

i. raise your concern I would like to reiterate my proposal regarding

· First, to remove confusion about the meaning of “private sector” in the ICANN Bylaws, we propose to expressly state that the private sector includes business stakeholders, civil society, the technical community and academia. ii. provide a rationale for your concern It is not the image of the current multistakeholder organization within ICANN. iii. please offer an alternative suggestion

To be change by · First, to remove confusion about the meaning of “private sector” in the ICANN Bylaws, we propose to expressly state that the private sector includes business providers, business users, individual end-users, civil society, academia and the technical community. Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/>/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com <mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com>>

De : <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com <mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com>> Date : vendredi 31 juillet 2015 18:30 À : Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Objet : [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Final clean of mission and core values from Becky

Attached in Word and PDF.

Contains HR wording agreed to today.

May need some formatting.

Cheers.

B. _______________________________________________ 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>_______________________________________________ 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>

---

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>

I think it's inaccurate to refer to the HR text proposed a few hours ago as "agreed to." For the avoidance of doubt, I am repeating my change to this text (proposed in another thread), in this thread as well: ========================== There is one element in the newly proposed additional text which really must be changed. It is the list of "requirements," being presented as if these are agreed text: These discussions identified the following, non-exhaustive, list of accountability-related requirements : - the NTIA criteria to maintain the openness of the Internet, including free expression and the free flow of information - the need to avoid extending Icann's mission into content regulation - the importance of assessing the impact of Icann policies on Human rights There was no agreement or consensus that these are "requirements." They are reasons offered during the discussions by those who wanted language (or particular language) included. I do not object to the first (because it's a statement of fact, and presented as such, and is not being used as an argument for particular text (to which I object)) or the third (because I agree with it, and it does not exclude other types of impact assessment). However, I have to object to the second "requirement." I've only seen this mentioned by one or two people and it has not even been seriously discussed on the list or on any call in relation to the Human Rights commitment. More to the point, I do not think that this point is a reason why we should have Human Rights language in the Bylaws and I object to the linkage being enshrined in this document. There are types of content control that clearly implicate Human Rights concerns and others that do not (indeed there are those that are consistent with and uphold fundamental Human Rights). ICANN's relationship to "content regulation" is not *per se* a Human Rights issue. If we had time, I might make a broad demand regarding this section, which would be followed by discussion and most likely a compromise. Since we don't have time, I will start with the compromise, which removes no text (even text I disagree with). It simply revises the introduction so there is no implication that this is an agreed list of "requirements": In these discussions, some participants raised the following as accountability-related reasons for including a commitment to fundamental Human Rights in the Bylaws: : I can live with this in the text without further comment. Please make this change. Thank you. ======================== Greg On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> wrote:

Thanks!

The language incorporated on HR addresses the point I made (regarding ICANN's mission) earlier today in a separate email thread. Looks good to me.

Best, Keith

On Jul 31, 2015, at 12:31 PM, Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> wrote:

Attached in Word and PDF.

Contains HR wording agreed to today.

May need some formatting.

Cheers.

B.

<31 July FINAL clean TEXT FOR REPORT Revised Mission & Core Values from Initial Draft Report.pdf>

<31 July FINAL clean TEXT FOR REPORT Revised Mission & Core Values from Initial Draft Report.docx>

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

There is NO AGREEMENT on any text rather than a high level reference to the recognition of human rights as a fundamental issue in ICANN mission in Bylaws Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone

On 1 Aug 2015, at 03:43, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:

I think it's inaccurate to refer to the HR text proposed a few hours ago as "agreed to." For the avoidance of doubt, I am repeating my change to this text (proposed in another thread), in this thread as well:

==========================

There is one element in the newly proposed additional text which really must be changed. It is the list of "requirements," being presented as if these are agreed text:

These discussions identified the following, non-exhaustive, list of accountability-related requirements : - the NTIA criteria to maintain the openness of the Internet, including free expression and the free flow of information - the need to avoid extending Icann's mission into content regulation - the importance of assessing the impact of Icann policies on Human rights

There was no agreement or consensus that these are "requirements." They are reasons offered during the discussions by those who wanted language (or particular language) included. I do not object to the first (because it's a statement of fact, and presented as such, and is not being used as an argument for particular text (to which I object)) or the third (because I agree with it, and it does not exclude other types of impact assessment).

However, I have to object to the second "requirement." I've only seen this mentioned by one or two people and it has not even been seriously discussed on the list or on any call in relation to the Human Rights commitment. More to the point, I do not think that this point is a reason why we should have Human Rights language in the Bylaws and I object to the linkage being enshrined in this document. There are types of content control that clearly implicate Human Rights concerns and others that do not (indeed there are those that are consistent with and uphold fundamental Human Rights). ICANN's relationship to "content regulation" is not per se a Human Rights issue.

If we had time, I might make a broad demand regarding this section, which would be followed by discussion and most likely a compromise. Since we don't have time, I will start with the compromise, which removes no text (even text I disagree with). It simply revises the introduction so there is no implication that this is an agreed list of "requirements":

In these discussions, some participants raised the following as accountability-related reasons for including a commitment to fundamental Human Rights in the Bylaws: :

I can live with this in the text without further comment. Please make this change. Thank you.

========================

Greg

...

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> wrote: Thanks!

The language incorporated on HR addresses the point I made (regarding ICANN's mission) earlier today in a separate email thread. Looks good to me.

Best, Keith

On Jul 31, 2015, at 12:31 PM, Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Attached in Word and PDF.

Contains HR wording agreed to today.

May need some formatting.

Cheers.

B. <31 July FINAL clean TEXT FOR REPORT Revised Mission & Core Values from Initial Draft Report.pdf> <31 July FINAL clean TEXT FOR REPORT Revised Mission & Core Values from Initial Draft Report.docx> _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community