- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by narten＠us.ibm.com Nov. 11, 2016

Nov. 11, 2016

Total of 32 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Nov 11 00:53:04 EST 2016 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 18.75% | 6 | 18.98% | 88822 | evan at telly.org 18.75% | 6 | 11.32% | 52996 | bzs at theworld.com 3.12% | 1 | 25.19% | 117903 | parminder at itforchange.net 15.62% | 5 | 9.12% | 42659 | julf at julf.com 12.50% | 4 | 9.56% | 44739 | karl at cavebear.com 9.38% | 3 | 5.53% | 25861 | johnl at iecc.com 6.25% | 2 | 8.33% | 38975 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 6.25% | 2 | 4.05% | 18936 | sb at inapp.com 3.12% | 1 | 4.03% | 18883 | joly at punkcast.com 3.12% | 1 | 2.34% | 10938 | narten at us.ibm.com 3.12% | 1 | 1.55% | 7270 | mail at christopherwilkinson.eu --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 32 |100.00% | 467982 | Total

1 0

New Public Comment: Proposed ICANN Community Anti-Harassment Policy
by ICANN At-Large Staff Nov. 9, 2016

Nov. 9, 2016

Dear All, This is to let you know that the Public Comment on the ‘Proposed ICANN Community Anti-Harassment Policy’ has now gone live: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/anti-harassment-policy-2016-11-07-en. Public comment will end on 12 January 2017 23:59 UTC. During this period, anyone can submit comment via comments-anti-harassment-07nov16(a)icann.org<mailto:comments-anti-harassment-07nov16@icann.org>. As an advisory committee of ICANN, the ALAC submits Statements on Public Comment and advises on policy matters related to the interest of Internet users worldwide. Not just limited to the 15 ALAC members, members from the wider At-Large community are welcome to draft a Statement on behalf of the ALAC. If you are interested in drafting an ALAC Statement on this Public Comment, kindly contact staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. At-Large Staff will follow up and help you understand the procedure. Additionally, the wiki workspace for developing a potential ALAC Statement is here: https://community.icann.org/x/Qo7DAw. All pertinent resources for this public comment can also be found there. Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Terri Agnew and Yeşim Nazlar ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0

ICANN's US jurisdiction
by parminder Nov. 9, 2016

Nov. 9, 2016

All As you know, the issue of jurisdiction of ICANN is under consideration at ICANN's community process (in the accountability track where there is a sub group discussing this issue). ICANN is currently meeting in Hyderabad, India, from 3rd to 9th November. Today, on the last day of ICANN's Hyderabad meeting, the enclosed statement was issued by key Indian civil society organisations engaged with Internet governance issues, supported by two key global networks involved in this area. The statement expresses the urgent need for transiting ICANN from being under the jurisdiction of one country, presenting the rationale of why this is important to do. It also lists some possible options of doing so, towards beginning a serious action-oriented deliberation on this very important matter. Unlike what is often understood, the jurisdiction issue is not just a matter of sovereign prestige and self respect of the states but concerns vital matters impacting people's rights. This is especially so as the society gets more and more digitised in all areas. We welcome comments and feedback. The statement has been issued by the following Indian civil society organisations. _Centre for Internet and Society <http://cis-india.org/>_, Bangalore _IT for Change <http://www.itforchange.net/>_, Bangalore _Free Software Movement of India <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Movement_of_India>_, Hyderabad _Society for Knowledge Commons <http://www.knowledgecommons.in/>_, New Delhi _Digital Empowerment Foundation <http://defindia.org/>_, New Delhi _Delhi Science Forum <http://www.delhiscienceforum.net/>_, New Delhi _Software Freedom Law Cent_er_ India_, New Delhi _Third World Network - India <https://twnetwork.org/>_, New Delhi It is supported by the following global networks: _Association For Progressive Communications <https://www.apc.org/>_ _Just Net Coalition <http://justnetcoalition.org/>_ <http://justnetcoalition.org/> We will soon expand this effort to enlist more global support. Best, Parminder _ <http://justnetcoalition.org/>_ _ <http://justnetcoalition.org/>_ _ <http://justnetcoalition.org/>_ _ <http://justnetcoalition.org/>_

1 0

WEBCAST TUE/WED: Latin America and Caribbean Regional Internet and Development Dialogue
by Joly MacFie Nov. 8, 2016

Nov. 8, 2016

Just started. This is mostly, if not all, in Spanish. joly posted: "On Tuesday-Wednesday November 8-9 2016 the Latin America and Caribbean Regional Internet and Development Dialogue (LACRIDD) will take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The conference will consist of opening and closing sessions, plenary sessions as well a" [image: livestream] <https://livestream.com/internetsociety/lacridd/>On *Tuesday-Wednesday November 8-9 2016* the *Latin America and Caribbean Regional Internet and Development Dialogue <http://internetsociety.org/lac/ridd/>* (LACRIDD) will take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The conference will consist of opening and closing sessions, plenary sessions as well as panel discussions. With the theme '*The Internet of Opportunity: Building a sustainable future through an inclusive Internet*' LACRIDD will have a one and half day program covering a range of topical issues related to Internet and Development in the LAC region. Special attention will be given to the transformational potential of ICT and Internet for SDGs, as well as mainstreaming gender within topical discussions. The conference will offer open high-level discussions addressing the following dimensions: Connecting the Next Billion; ICTs and Sustainable Development; Digital Economy. A webcast is available via the *Internet Society Livestream Channel <https://livestream.com/internetsociety/lacridd/>*. Buenos Aires is 2 hrs ahead of NYC (UTC-3). *What: Latin America and Caribbean Regional Internet and Development Dialogue <http://internetsociety.org/lac/ridd/> Where: Buenos Aires, Argentina When: Tuesday-Wednesday November 8-9 2016 Program: http://internetsociety.org/lac/ridd/ <http://internetsociety.org/lac/ridd/> Webcast: https://livestream.com/internetsociety/lacridd/ <https://livestream.com/internetsociety/lacridd/> Twitter: #lacridd https://twitter.com/hashtag/LACRIDD <https://twitter.com/hashtag/LACRIDD>* Comment <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8774#respond> See all comments <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8774#comments> *Permalink* http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8774 <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8774> -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

IGO names: is this worth war?
by Evan Leibovitch Nov. 8, 2016

Nov. 8, 2016

Hello everyone, As the Hyderabad meeting gets underway, we have a potential for a conflict that, according to some, is a source of utter panic and a critical-enough battle that it is worth threatening ICANN's stability... and people still haven't yet fully recovered from the transition and the Ted Cruz scare. I am speaking of the Governmental Advisory Commitee (GAC) wanting to reserve about 230 names and acronyms of inter-governmental organizations (IGOs), and its threat to pull out of ICANN entirely and take its issues to the ITU Standardization Assembly. The whole story can be found in a post at DomainIncite <http://domainincite.com/21215-rant-governments-raise-yet-another-un-threat-…> that contains both profanity and apocalyptic tones. At the threat of being an ICANN heretic (and it wouldn't be the first time), I'm on the side of the governments here. [ Disclosure: I currently work at an agency that would be among the protected IGOs. However I have been involved in this issue, at the ICANN working group level, for many years, and my position is no different now than it was then. ] While it is overkill to give a blanket ban on every IGO, I would rather give protection to a handful of organizations that don't need it, in return for protecting a number of organizations that would be critically impacted if their names were not protected. I am speaking specifically regarding organizations that do significant public fundraising in the public good -- the Red Cross (+ Red Crescent, etc), UNICEF, UNHCR, and others I was involved when the issue first came up in 2011; there was a working group that was proposing to reserve names for the Red Cross and Olympics in all gTLDs. Most in the group were either all-for or all-against; I was split, opposing the Olympic reservations but strongly supporting reservations of any Red Cross related names or translations. I still believe that the ICRC needs protection more than the IOC, but given the choice of protecting both or protecting neither I would absolutely come down on the side of "both". *There most absolutely is a public interest in the reservation of names related to the Red Cross, United Nations and other IGOs, especially those that are engaged in public information or fundraising.* It matters far more to me that a scammer is prevented before-the-fact from registering "redcross-italy-earthquake.xyz" than that the domain industry is free to sell "UNDP.whatever" to a speculator. By the time a URS claim could be filed against the scammer and adjudicated, the damage is done and the scammer moves on. IMO it is not in the interest of the At-Large community to support the unfettered entitlement of the domain industry to sell whatever it wants without consideration of consequences. It is in our interests to keep the public from being harmed through the actions of the DNS. And, *on the balance*, this means that reserving the names of IGOs serves the public interest. The domain industry's main counter-argument is that it should be entitled to sell whatever it wants. It believes that that WHO, the acronym for the World Health Organization but also a dictionary word, should be fair game to be sold as a domain to an ageing rock band or anyone else. But I am concerned that a scammer -- or others with bad intent -- could use the WHO.something domain to present themselves as the World Health Organization and either present misinformation or engage in scamming fundraising. In a public-health context such misuse could have horrible aftermath.The harm to the domain community by blocking WHO.everything is less, IMO, than the harm to the public from letting that go to the highest bidder. (Of course the WHO is always within its ability to permit who.something to point to the rock band, etc) If the counter is that ICANN's MSM process does not allow for this kind of accommodation -- that the GNSO demands for wide open domains do not provide for this kind of exception -- then the process is broken. It must be remembered that -- pre-transition or post- -- ICANN is not itself an IGO. Sovereign states are not treaty-bound to honor GNSO policy decrees, they do so through trust and goodwill. If that goodwill is damaged then, ICANN will pay a heavy and possibly irreversible price. There are many good places to take a principled stand in support of the MSM and against dictatorial control of the DNS. But reserving IGO names is not one of those good places. As much as I abhor the reserving of the string "olympic", that speaks more to my personal belief in the corruption of the IOC than principled opposition to the concept. If the ALAC is consulted on this issue -- or if it considers issuing advice on its own initiative -- I simply ask that it asserts the point of view of the public interest, which is not always in selling the maximum number of domains for the maximum obtainable price. Thank you. Evan Leibovitch Toronto / Geneva

18 58

Pictures of the APRALO Showcase (6 Nov)
by Satish Babu Nov. 7, 2016

Nov. 7, 2016

https://www.flickr.com/photos/glennmcknight/albums/72157674603896632 Thanks Glenn! satish

1 1

Call for Comments: ALAC Statement on the Middle East and Adjoining Countries 2016-2019 Strategy
by ICANN At-Large Staff Nov. 5, 2016

Nov. 5, 2016

Dear All, Wafa Dahmani, ALAC Member from the African Regional At-Large Organization (AFRALO) and John Laprise, member of the North American Regional At-Large Organization (NARALO) have developed the first draft ALAC Statement on the Middle East and Adjoining Countries 2016-2019 Strategy<https://community.icann.org/x/FInDAw>. The draft, as well as pertinent resources that provide background to this Statement, can be found in its wiki workspace here: https://community.icann.org/x/FInDAw. All At-Large members are welcome to comment on this draft. Please take a moment to review this draft and if you have input, please submit it in the wiki workspace using the comment function by 07 November 2016 before the At-Large Leadership Wrap Up Session 3 on 15:15 UTC (local Hyderabad time, UTC + 5:30). You will need to log in to the wiki to use the comment function. If you don’t have a login or have other issue using the wiki, kindly contact staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Terri Agnew and Yeşim Nazlar ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by narten＠us.ibm.com Nov. 4, 2016

Nov. 4, 2016

Total of 41 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Nov 4 00:53:04 EDT 2016 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 14.63% | 6 | 10.30% | 68069 | bzs at theworld.com 9.76% | 4 | 11.22% | 74165 | evan at telly.org 12.20% | 5 | 5.92% | 39094 | julf at julf.com 7.32% | 3 | 9.02% | 59608 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 4.88% | 2 | 7.88% | 52087 | svg at milathan.ltd 4.88% | 2 | 7.73% | 51102 | javrua at gmail.com 7.32% | 3 | 3.83% | 25303 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 4.88% | 2 | 4.79% | 31655 | seun.ojedeji at gmail.com 2.44% | 1 | 6.93% | 45822 | roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com 2.44% | 1 | 6.70% | 44250 | vanda at scartezini.org 4.88% | 2 | 2.86% | 18893 | ocl at gih.com 4.88% | 2 | 2.53% | 16719 | johnl at iecc.com 2.44% | 1 | 4.63% | 30627 | yrjo_lansipuro at hotmail.com 2.44% | 1 | 3.88% | 25611 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 2.44% | 1 | 2.77% | 18333 | joly at punkcast.com 2.44% | 1 | 2.08% | 13778 | derek at aa419.org 2.44% | 1 | 2.08% | 13731 | w.yu at gmx.net 2.44% | 1 | 1.69% | 11144 | cdel at firsthand.net 2.44% | 1 | 1.67% | 11028 | parminder at itforchange.net 2.44% | 1 | 1.50% | 9884 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 41 |100.00% | 660903 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] IGO names: is this worth war?
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 2, 2016

Nov. 2, 2016

I know this is a fun thread, but perhaps we should make sure that all participants know what we are talking about. It is not any prohibition on registering IGO acronyms. That was rejected long ago. It is a proposal (among others) to put some acronyms in the Trademark clearing house so that if someone tries to register one of the "protected" acronyms, the IGO is notified and can try to ensure that the string is not used to mis-represent them. The concern is that even though (in my opinion) the proposal is reasonable, there is no way to easy way to implement it given the current GNSO-Board procedures. Thomas did not threaten to have the GAC leave. He said that if governments are dissatisfied with ICANN, they may look for other options. That is a fact - WTSA Resolution 47 demonstrates it. Alan >Lest we get distracted by process as ICANN does so often and so >well, let's also remember the substance of the issue. Multiple >people on this thread have complained "why should we afford >protection to the XXX if we don't give it to someone else >deserving?" or "why should ICANN give protection to XXX that it >doesn't get elsewhere?"

1 0

WEBCAST TODAY: The Self Governing Internet – Celebrating the #IANA transition and #ICANN reforms #IANAsteward @IGPAlert @sppgatech
by Joly MacFie Nov. 2, 2016

Nov. 2, 2016

It took a few days for video to emerge of last week's Georgia Tech event, and when it did the audio wasn't so good. I have cleaned it up to the best of my ability and added some titles. There was a technical problem with the render earlier in the day (PC crash!) which belayed the 7pm time, and I now expect to stream this around 2am EDT = 06:00 UTC. It's a good session. Two parts - first Milton and Larry. Then the panel, with some penetrating questions from the student body. joly posted: "On Friday October 28 2016 the New America Foundation Cybersecurity Initiative presented Cyber Insecurity: Emerging Policy Tools in Cybersecurity in Washington DC. A panel explored a set of emerging policy tools with distinctly partnered public-private pro" On October 26 2016 the *Internet Governance Project <http://www.internetgovernance.org/>* at the *Georgia Institute of Technology’s School of Public Policy <http://www.spp.gatech.edu/>* presented *The Self Governing Internet – Celebrating the IANA transition and ICANN reforms <http://www.internetgovernance.org/2016/10/05/the-self-governing-internet/>* in Atlanta. Special honoree will Assistant Secretary *Lawrence Strickling*, receiving recognition for his persistent and principled commitment to putting “the global multistakeholder community” in charge of IANA and ICANN. The event also featured remarks on the long term implications of the transition by a panel of experts, including Internet Architecture Board Chair *Andrew Sullivan*, Georgia Tech professors *Milton Mueller *and *Peter Swire*, the Internet Society’s Senior Policy Advisor *Konstantinos Komaitis*, and Verisign’s Vice President for public policy and government *Keith Drazek*. An edited version of the event will be *webcast at 7pm today* on the *Internet Society Livestream Channel <https://livestream.com/internetsociety/igpalert>*. Twitter: @igpalert *https://twitter.com/IGPAlert <https://twitter.com/IGPAlert>*. *Watch on livestream*: https://livestream.com/internetsociety/igpalert *Permalink* http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8738 -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0