Dear colleagues, Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments! What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here? I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :) Curious to hear what you all think! Best, Niels
Hi Niels, Great work! I agree with Niels - dendogram would be great! Some comments from me: 1. 'Human Rights in Internet Governance' might be too broad, as ICANN and its policies are just part of the 'Internet Governance Discussions', so we might want to narrow it down somewhat to make it explicit this is only ICANN-related. As there are many other areas in IG that affect HR, but we dont list them here. Some purely on visuals: 2. In my view, the glossary and all the columns at the top would look better at the bottom of the page. Similarly, the words 'THEME', etc, in my view, look better at the top. 3. (purely personal taste): orange boxes with white text look somewhat not in consistency with the overall elegance of the style, perhaps because of black shadowing or something - I am not sure, but it gives me somewhat different look than the rest. And that rest looks very good:) Best wishes, Monika ---- Dr. Monika Zalnieriute Melbourne Law School | The University of Melbourne I law.unimelb.edu.au I Center for Media, Data and Society I Central European University I cmds.ceu.edu I Executive Committee I Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group I ICANN I icann.org I Z E P H I R O : Progressive Platform for Human Rights I zephiroplatform.org I Centre for Internet & Human Rights I European University Viadrina I cihr.eu I ________________________________________ From: cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org <cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:07 AM To: Human Rights; cc-humanrights-research@icann.org Cc: Giulia De Amicis Subject: [cc-humanrights-research] ICANN visualization 2nd draft Dear colleagues, Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments! What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here? I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :) Curious to hear what you all think! Best, Niels The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Dear Niels: This is amazing work. I really like the way it turned out. My only question is whether the human rights indicated are all the relevant rights in the context of ICANN. They feel right to me but we don't know for sure unless we carry out a thorough review of all the ICANN policies, it seems to me. Motoko *Motoko Aizawa | Managing Director USA* *M* +1 202 763 1503 *|**S* MotokoSkype11 *I* *W* www.ihrb.org *I T* *@ <haley.st.dennis@ihrb.org>**IHRB* *Bogot*á *| **Brussel**s * *| **Geneva* *| **London* *|** Nairobi* *| **Washington D.C.* *|* *Yangon* On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Zalnieriute, Monika < Monika.Zalnieriute@eui.eu> wrote:
Hi Niels,
Great work! I agree with Niels - dendogram would be great!
Some comments from me:
1. 'Human Rights in Internet Governance' might be too broad, as ICANN and its policies are just part of the 'Internet Governance Discussions', so we might want to narrow it down somewhat to make it explicit this is only ICANN-related. As there are many other areas in IG that affect HR, but we dont list them here.
Some purely on visuals:
2. In my view, the glossary and all the columns at the top would look better at the bottom of the page. Similarly, the words 'THEME', etc, in my view, look better at the top.
3. (purely personal taste): orange boxes with white text look somewhat not in consistency with the overall elegance of the style, perhaps because of black shadowing or something - I am not sure, but it gives me somewhat different look than the rest. And that rest looks very good:)
Best wishes,
Monika
----
Dr. Monika Zalnieriute
Melbourne Law School | The University of Melbourne I law.unimelb.edu.au I Center for Media, Data and Society I Central European University I cmds.ceu.edu I Executive Committee I Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group I ICANN I icann.org I Z E P H I R O : Progressive Platform for Human Rights I zephiroplatform.org I Centre for Internet & Human Rights I European University Viadrina I cihr.eu I
________________________________________ From: cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org < cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Niels ten Oever < niels@article19.org> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:07 AM To: Human Rights; cc-humanrights-research@icann.org Cc: Giulia De Amicis Subject: [cc-humanrights-research] ICANN visualization 2nd draft
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
It's important to incorporate recognition of how international rights work in relation to how we're accustomed to how rights working. You can see this in relation to how the EU CoJ overruled the Safe Harbor Agreement, which was not based on rights enacted by treaty. The treaty-based Strasbourg Court, on the other hand, could have ruled the ECHR privacy right had been violated, but the treaty would have remained in place, and would have been simply modified/qualified with exceptions by the same governments whose executive branch actors wrote it in the first place. Seth On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Motoko Aizawa <motoko.aizawa@ihrb.org> wrote:
Dear Niels: This is amazing work. I really like the way it turned out. My only question is whether the human rights indicated are all the relevant rights in the context of ICANN. They feel right to me but we don't know for sure unless we carry out a thorough review of all the ICANN policies, it seems to me. Motoko
Motoko Aizawa | Managing Director USA M +1 202 763 1503 |S MotokoSkype11 I W www.ihrb.org I T @IHRB Bogotá | Brussels | Geneva | London | Nairobi | Washington D.C. | Yangon
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Zalnieriute, Monika <Monika.Zalnieriute@eui.eu> wrote:
Hi Niels,
Great work! I agree with Niels - dendogram would be great!
Some comments from me:
1. 'Human Rights in Internet Governance' might be too broad, as ICANN and its policies are just part of the 'Internet Governance Discussions', so we might want to narrow it down somewhat to make it explicit this is only ICANN-related. As there are many other areas in IG that affect HR, but we dont list them here.
Some purely on visuals:
2. In my view, the glossary and all the columns at the top would look better at the bottom of the page. Similarly, the words 'THEME', etc, in my view, look better at the top.
3. (purely personal taste): orange boxes with white text look somewhat not in consistency with the overall elegance of the style, perhaps because of black shadowing or something - I am not sure, but it gives me somewhat different look than the rest. And that rest looks very good:)
Best wishes,
Monika
----
Dr. Monika Zalnieriute
Melbourne Law School | The University of Melbourne I law.unimelb.edu.au I Center for Media, Data and Society I Central European University I cmds.ceu.edu I Executive Committee I Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group I ICANN I icann.org I Z E P H I R O : Progressive Platform for Human Rights I zephiroplatform.org I Centre for Internet & Human Rights I European University Viadrina I cihr.eu I
________________________________________ From: cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org <cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:07 AM To: Human Rights; cc-humanrights-research@icann.org Cc: Giulia De Amicis Subject: [cc-humanrights-research] ICANN visualization 2nd draft
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
(Editing egregious grammar) It's important to incorporate recognition of how international rights work as compared to how we're accustomed to rights working. You can see this in relation to how the EU CoJ overruled the Safe Harbor Agreement, which was not based on rights enacted by treaty. The treaty-based Strasbourg Court, on the other hand, could have ruled the ECHR privacy right had been violated, but the treaty would have remained in place, and would have been simply modified/qualified with exceptions by the same governments whose executive branch actors wrote it in the first place. Seth
Seth
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Motoko Aizawa <motoko.aizawa@ihrb.org> wrote:
Dear Niels: This is amazing work. I really like the way it turned out. My only question is whether the human rights indicated are all the relevant rights in the context of ICANN. They feel right to me but we don't know for sure unless we carry out a thorough review of all the ICANN policies, it seems to me. Motoko
Motoko Aizawa | Managing Director USA M +1 202 763 1503 |S MotokoSkype11 I W www.ihrb.org I T @IHRB Bogotá | Brussels | Geneva | London | Nairobi | Washington D.C. | Yangon
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Zalnieriute, Monika <Monika.Zalnieriute@eui.eu> wrote:
Hi Niels,
Great work! I agree with Niels - dendogram would be great!
Some comments from me:
1. 'Human Rights in Internet Governance' might be too broad, as ICANN and its policies are just part of the 'Internet Governance Discussions', so we might want to narrow it down somewhat to make it explicit this is only ICANN-related. As there are many other areas in IG that affect HR, but we dont list them here.
Some purely on visuals:
2. In my view, the glossary and all the columns at the top would look better at the bottom of the page. Similarly, the words 'THEME', etc, in my view, look better at the top.
3. (purely personal taste): orange boxes with white text look somewhat not in consistency with the overall elegance of the style, perhaps because of black shadowing or something - I am not sure, but it gives me somewhat different look than the rest. And that rest looks very good:)
Best wishes,
Monika
----
Dr. Monika Zalnieriute
Melbourne Law School | The University of Melbourne I law.unimelb.edu.au I Center for Media, Data and Society I Central European University I cmds.ceu.edu I Executive Committee I Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group I ICANN I icann.org I Z E P H I R O : Progressive Platform for Human Rights I zephiroplatform.org I Centre for Internet & Human Rights I European University Viadrina I cihr.eu I
________________________________________ From: cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org <cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:07 AM To: Human Rights; cc-humanrights-research@icann.org Cc: Giulia De Amicis Subject: [cc-humanrights-research] ICANN visualization 2nd draft
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
Hi Niels, Apologies for this delayed response. The visualization looks great! I like the level of detail that it allows us to get into. :) A few thoughts: 1. Instead of saying "Human rights in Internet Governance discussions" perhaps we could say "Human rights in the ICANN ecosystem" or something similar? (not sure if ecosystem if the word we're looking for). This could be more specific. 2. I like the idea of the Dendogram based on frameworks - however, do you think it might be better to have a separate visualization for that? Perhaps Aarti and Tatiana can give us an idea of how much detail would be idea for the frameworks. Cheers, Vidushi ----- On May 22, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.johnson@gmail.com wrote:
(Editing egregious grammar)
It's important to incorporate recognition of how international rights work as compared to how we're accustomed to rights working.
You can see this in relation to how the EU CoJ overruled the Safe Harbor Agreement, which was not based on rights enacted by treaty. The treaty-based Strasbourg Court, on the other hand, could have ruled the ECHR privacy right had been violated, but the treaty would have remained in place, and would have been simply modified/qualified with exceptions by the same governments whose executive branch actors wrote it in the first place.
Seth
Seth
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Motoko Aizawa <motoko.aizawa@ihrb.org> wrote:
Dear Niels: This is amazing work. I really like the way it turned out. My only question is whether the human rights indicated are all the relevant rights in the context of ICANN. They feel right to me but we don't know for sure unless we carry out a thorough review of all the ICANN policies, it seems to me. Motoko
Motoko Aizawa | Managing Director USA M +1 202 763 1503 |S MotokoSkype11 I W www.ihrb.org I T @IHRB Bogotá | Brussels | Geneva | London | Nairobi | Washington D.C. | Yangon
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Zalnieriute, Monika <Monika.Zalnieriute@eui.eu> wrote:
Hi Niels,
Great work! I agree with Niels - dendogram would be great!
Some comments from me:
1. 'Human Rights in Internet Governance' might be too broad, as ICANN and its policies are just part of the 'Internet Governance Discussions', so we might want to narrow it down somewhat to make it explicit this is only ICANN-related. As there are many other areas in IG that affect HR, but we dont list them here.
Some purely on visuals:
2. In my view, the glossary and all the columns at the top would look better at the bottom of the page. Similarly, the words 'THEME', etc, in my view, look better at the top.
3. (purely personal taste): orange boxes with white text look somewhat not in consistency with the overall elegance of the style, perhaps because of black shadowing or something - I am not sure, but it gives me somewhat different look than the rest. And that rest looks very good:)
Best wishes,
Monika
----
Dr. Monika Zalnieriute
Melbourne Law School | The University of Melbourne I law.unimelb.edu.au I Center for Media, Data and Society I Central European University I cmds.ceu.edu I Executive Committee I Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group I ICANN I icann.org I Z E P H I R O : Progressive Platform for Human Rights I zephiroplatform.org I Centre for Internet & Human Rights I European University Viadrina I cihr.eu I
________________________________________ From: cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org <cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:07 AM To: Human Rights; cc-humanrights-research@icann.org Cc: Giulia De Amicis Subject: [cc-humanrights-research] ICANN visualization 2nd draft
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
EXCELLENT work Niels, The diagram does make it a lot easier to understand the link between the "Human Right" and the corresponding ICANN policy/process. I will take a more detail look and provide further comments if possible. regards Karel On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 7:39 AM, <vidushi@cis-india.org> wrote:
Hi Niels,
Apologies for this delayed response.
The visualization looks great! I like the level of detail that it allows us to get into. :) A few thoughts:
1. Instead of saying "Human rights in Internet Governance discussions" perhaps we could say "Human rights in the ICANN ecosystem" or something similar? (not sure if ecosystem if the word we're looking for). This could be more specific. 2. I like the idea of the Dendogram based on frameworks - however, do you think it might be better to have a separate visualization for that? Perhaps Aarti and Tatiana can give us an idea of how much detail would be idea for the frameworks.
Cheers,
Vidushi
----- On May 22, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.johnson@gmail.com wrote:
(Editing egregious grammar)
It's important to incorporate recognition of how international rights work as compared to how we're accustomed to rights working.
You can see this in relation to how the EU CoJ overruled the Safe Harbor Agreement, which was not based on rights enacted by treaty. The treaty-based Strasbourg Court, on the other hand, could have ruled the ECHR privacy right had been violated, but the treaty would have remained in place, and would have been simply modified/qualified with exceptions by the same governments whose executive branch actors wrote it in the first place.
Seth
Seth
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Motoko Aizawa <motoko.aizawa@ihrb.org>
wrote:
Dear Niels: This is amazing work. I really like the way it turned out. My only question is whether the human rights indicated are all the relevant rights in the context of ICANN. They feel right to me but we don't know for sure unless we carry out a thorough review of all the ICANN policies, it seems to me. Motoko
Motoko Aizawa | Managing Director USA M +1 202 763 1503 |S MotokoSkype11 I W www.ihrb.org I T @IHRB Bogotá | Brussels | Geneva | London | Nairobi | Washington D.C. | Yangon
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Zalnieriute, Monika <Monika.Zalnieriute@eui.eu> wrote:
Hi Niels,
Great work! I agree with Niels - dendogram would be great!
Some comments from me:
1. 'Human Rights in Internet Governance' might be too broad, as
ICANN and
its policies are just part of the 'Internet Governance Discussions', so we might want to narrow it down somewhat to make it explicit this is only ICANN-related. As there are many other areas in IG that affect HR, but we dont list them here.
Some purely on visuals:
2. In my view, the glossary and all the columns at the top would look better at the bottom of the page. Similarly, the words 'THEME', etc, in my view, look better at the top.
3. (purely personal taste): orange boxes with white text look somewhat not in consistency with the overall elegance of the style, perhaps because of black shadowing or something - I am not sure, but it gives me somewhat different look than the rest. And that rest looks very good:)
Best wishes,
Monika
----
Dr. Monika Zalnieriute
Melbourne Law School | The University of Melbourne I law.unimelb.edu.au I Center for Media, Data and Society I Central European University I cmds.ceu.edu I Executive Committee I Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group I ICANN I icann.org I Z E P H I R O : Progressive Platform for Human Rights I zephiroplatform.org I Centre for Internet & Human Rights I European University Viadrina I cihr.eu I
________________________________________ From: cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org <cc-humanrights-research-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:07 AM To: Human Rights; cc-humanrights-research@icann.org Cc: Giulia De Amicis Subject: [cc-humanrights-research] ICANN visualization 2nd draft
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
cc-humanrights-research mailing list cc-humanrights-research@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights-research
Hi, I like the mindmap way of looking at this. Also allows for each of the end nodes to go into more detail without needing to show that detail all the time. Is the mindmap file available and is further work planned on it? Is it in one of those environments that allows for cooperative online work? Or is this only an Article 19 proposal as the file name indicates. Some points on the content of the chart. - On new gTLD you may want to add something about gTLD and developing economies under economic, social (and what happened to cultural) rights. I.e. new gTLD program comes under this category as well. - under FoA and new gTLDs, you may want to consider two branches, one dealing with the existing program, in which case the AGB of 2012, as an implementation of the policy of 2007, is an issue. For new gTLD, the AGB, as an implementation is not the starting point, but the reevaluation of the GNSO Policy of 2007 and its implementation will be the issue. This is similar to what was done for FoE. - under FoA, is the structure of ICANN internal working structure for the community at all an additional consideration? - under gender and diversity, is the ombudsman the only consideration? What about the new policies such as the one that is being proposed in https://www.icann.org/public-comments/expected-standards-revisions-2016-05-1... avri On 21-May-16 06:07, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
Hi all, Thank you very much for your great comments. This is going to be quite a long email, so brace yourself ;) 1. - "HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNET GOVERNANCE DISCUSSION" This is indeed too broad. This should be: 'Scoping the relation between ICANN and Human Rights' 2. Glossary Let's try the glossary at the bottom and HR principles on top. 3. We should have a disclaimer text on top or at the bottom indicating that 'this is a preliminary scoping, pending a full Human Rights Impact Assessment' 4. I would not drag in the European Court of Human Rights, I am afraid this will make matter only more complicated. But let me know what you all think. 5. I am hesitant to use the work 'ecosystem', because it goes back to the thinking of Buckminster Fuller which implies that the system is 'natural' and therefore 'evident' and 'inescapable'. Therefore I am a bit hesistant of using these terms. (This all gets much better discussed in the beautiful BBC documentary by Adam Curtis: 'all watched over by machines of loving grace') 6. I have made an initial idea for the rights dendogram (and principles), let me know what you think, or Giulia could have a first go at it: **On top** Human Rights principles: * Inherent - human rights derive from the humanity of each person. * Universal - all human beings have the same human rights. * Inalienable - human rights cannot be given up. * Indivisible - there are no conflicts between rights and no priorities among rights. There will be situations or occasions where rights must be balanced and prudent decisions taken about how all rights can best be protected and promoted * Interdependent and Interrelated - the enjoyment and fulfilment of any right depends on the enjoyment and fulfilment of other rights. * Equality and Non-discrimination: All individuals are equal as human beings and by virtue of the inherent dignity of each human person * Participation and Inclusion: All people have the right to participate in and access information relating to the decision-making processes that affect their lives and well-being. * Accountability and Rule of Law: States and other duty-bearers are answerable for the observance of human rights. In this regard, they have to comply with the legal norms and standards enshrined in international human rights instruments. **Dendogram 2** First Generation: - Universal Declaration of Human Rights Second Generation: - International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 1966 - International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) 1966 - International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) 1965 - Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 1979 - Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) 2006 Guidelines: UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011) UN Global Compact (2000) 7. There should be no space between WHO and IS (so WHOIS) 8. After DNSSEC we should perhaps also add: Implementation of DANE 9. Gender / Race / Diversity issues probably could be renamed as: Participation, Inclusion, Equality and Non-Discrimination and we can add to the final column: - participation by people with a disability in ICANN process (including meetings) - anti-harassment policy 10. I think all DIDP, DCND and IDNs should not be named as accronyms, but rather fully written down. 11. Addition to the glossary: DNSSEC = Domain Name System Security Extensions IGO = Intergovernmental Organization INGO = International Non-Governmental Organziation RPM = Rights Protection Mechanism (as related to Intellectual Property Rights) I think IP adress can be remove 12. Inline repsonses to Avri's great e-mail (thanks!): On 05/22/2016 04:01 PM, avri doria wrote:
Hi,
I like the mindmap way of looking at this. Also allows for each of the end nodes to go into more detail without needing to show that detail all the time. Is the mindmap file available and is further work planned on it? Is it in one of those environments that allows for cooperative online work?
Unfortunately not, it is made by a designer, but it would be great if a volunteer wants to reproduce this as (online) mindmap.
Or is this only an Article 19 proposal as the file name indicates.
Nope, this work was initially started by Marilia, then first images were produced by APC, finally I took over the baton because others were focused on other work. Once this is approved by the CCWP it is, as everything here, a product of the CCWP HR.
Some points on the content of the chart.
- On new gTLD you may want to add something about gTLD and developing economies under economic, social (and what happened to cultural) rights. I.e. new gTLD program comes under this category as well.
Indeed, we should add cultural so it reads: 'Economic, social and cultural rights', but gTLDs are mentioned under freedom of association, right? It also say 'community based TLDs'. You think we should elaborate.
- under FoA and new gTLDs, you may want to consider two branches, one dealing with the existing program, in which case the AGB of 2012, as an implementation of the policy of 2007, is an issue. For new gTLD, the AGB, as an implementation is not the starting point, but the reevaluation of the GNSO Policy of 2007 and its implementation will be the issue. This is similar to what was done for FoE.
I am having a hard time understanding how the Applicant Guidebook (AGB) implementation and revisioning is done. Could someone with more understanding of this suggest a vizualization (wording of branches)?
- under FoA, is the structure of ICANN internal working structure for the community at all an additional consideration?
Sure, how shall we word it?
- under gender and diversity, is the ombudsman the only consideration? What about the new policies such as the one that is being proposed in https://www.icann.org/public-comments/expected-standards-revisions-2016-05-1...
Adressed above and added a few. So I hope this helps, with this I'll ask Giulia to make a new version, but keep your comments and text suggestions coming! Best, Niels
avri
On 21-May-16 06:07, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
You should be careful from the outset when you use language about ICANN to define the parameters of the project. The title of what we're doing can and should be stated the way you have, but what we're doing entails understanding what happens to human rights (of all kinds, not just treaty-based ones) in the transition. Though the FOI must be scoped to ICANN and the By-laws, the matter involves a broader view, considering the issue with reference to the surrounding context and where we are ending up in the transition. Even if ICANN has very appropriately declared it has no governmental authority and doesn't enforce human rights, our task includes making clear what happens when we move away from *that* one government as the "host," to "all the governments" (understanding that *extremely* amorphously). It's important to remember that the nature of the issue of human rights isn't necessarily structurally wedded to ICANN structures, so we can't accidentally let it be treated that way. Addressing the issue of human rights should mean addressing how we understand human rights to be referenced with respect to *what the transition means* for human rights. This can be done very well by commenting on the nature of "standard of review" and how the transition to a "more international" legal basis for rights affects that. That would be my comment on the document(s?) we've seen so far. In the "streamlined approach" one, I would say add a point observing that peoples in individual countries (or federal unions, as we just saw with the Safe Harbor Agreement in the EU) have very strong rights that have to be recognized. (As we start out, I think we can and should set aside the tangentially related matter some have raised elsewhere, of CA as the legal locus for ICANN's incorporation. That's only one notion of the issue of jurisdiction, and for that matter isn't particularly relevant to human rights, certainly given that I presume we all see the human rights issue the way I just described it -- working more from understanding how things work as we move to the "all the governments" international context. It can be considered in the jurisdiction discussion, and is vaguely relevant to rights in another sense -- ICANN as a "person" and its member[s] holding rights that relate to a US state in the "US federal republic of republics.") Seth On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> wrote:
Hi all,
Thank you very much for your great comments. This is going to be quite a long email, so brace yourself ;)
1. - "HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNET GOVERNANCE DISCUSSION" This is indeed too broad. This should be: 'Scoping the relation between ICANN and Human Rights'
2. Glossary Let's try the glossary at the bottom and HR principles on top.
3. We should have a disclaimer text on top or at the bottom indicating that 'this is a preliminary scoping, pending a full Human Rights Impact Assessment'
4. I would not drag in the European Court of Human Rights, I am afraid this will make matter only more complicated. But let me know what you all think.
5. I am hesitant to use the work 'ecosystem', because it goes back to the thinking of Buckminster Fuller which implies that the system is 'natural' and therefore 'evident' and 'inescapable'. Therefore I am a bit hesistant of using these terms. (This all gets much better discussed in the beautiful BBC documentary by Adam Curtis: 'all watched over by machines of loving grace')
6. I have made an initial idea for the rights dendogram (and principles), let me know what you think, or Giulia could have a first go at it:
**On top** Human Rights principles: * Inherent - human rights derive from the humanity of each person. * Universal - all human beings have the same human rights. * Inalienable - human rights cannot be given up. * Indivisible - there are no conflicts between rights and no priorities among rights. There will be situations or occasions where rights must be balanced and prudent decisions taken about how all rights can best be protected and promoted * Interdependent and Interrelated - the enjoyment and fulfilment of any right depends on the enjoyment and fulfilment of other rights. * Equality and Non-discrimination: All individuals are equal as human beings and by virtue of the inherent dignity of each human person * Participation and Inclusion: All people have the right to participate in and access information relating to the decision-making processes that affect their lives and well-being. * Accountability and Rule of Law: States and other duty-bearers are answerable for the observance of human rights. In this regard, they have to comply with the legal norms and standards enshrined in international human rights instruments.
**Dendogram 2** First Generation: - Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Second Generation: - International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 1966 - International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) 1966 - International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) 1965 - Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 1979 - Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) 2006
Guidelines: UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011) UN Global Compact (2000)
7. There should be no space between WHO and IS (so WHOIS)
8. After DNSSEC we should perhaps also add: Implementation of DANE
9. Gender / Race / Diversity issues probably could be renamed as: Participation, Inclusion, Equality and Non-Discrimination
and we can add to the final column: - participation by people with a disability in ICANN process (including meetings) - anti-harassment policy
10. I think all DIDP, DCND and IDNs should not be named as accronyms, but rather fully written down.
11. Addition to the glossary: DNSSEC = Domain Name System Security Extensions IGO = Intergovernmental Organization INGO = International Non-Governmental Organziation RPM = Rights Protection Mechanism (as related to Intellectual Property Rights)
I think IP adress can be remove
12. Inline repsonses to Avri's great e-mail (thanks!):
On 05/22/2016 04:01 PM, avri doria wrote:
Hi,
I like the mindmap way of looking at this. Also allows for each of the end nodes to go into more detail without needing to show that detail all the time. Is the mindmap file available and is further work planned on it? Is it in one of those environments that allows for cooperative online work?
Unfortunately not, it is made by a designer, but it would be great if a volunteer wants to reproduce this as (online) mindmap.
Or is this only an Article 19 proposal as the file name indicates.
Nope, this work was initially started by Marilia, then first images were produced by APC, finally I took over the baton because others were focused on other work. Once this is approved by the CCWP it is, as everything here, a product of the CCWP HR.
Some points on the content of the chart.
- On new gTLD you may want to add something about gTLD and developing economies under economic, social (and what happened to cultural) rights. I.e. new gTLD program comes under this category as well.
Indeed, we should add cultural so it reads: 'Economic, social and cultural rights', but gTLDs are mentioned under freedom of association, right? It also say 'community based TLDs'. You think we should elaborate.
- under FoA and new gTLDs, you may want to consider two branches, one dealing with the existing program, in which case the AGB of 2012, as an implementation of the policy of 2007, is an issue. For new gTLD, the AGB, as an implementation is not the starting point, but the reevaluation of the GNSO Policy of 2007 and its implementation will be the issue. This is similar to what was done for FoE.
I am having a hard time understanding how the Applicant Guidebook (AGB) implementation and revisioning is done. Could someone with more understanding of this suggest a vizualization (wording of branches)?
- under FoA, is the structure of ICANN internal working structure for the community at all an additional consideration?
Sure, how shall we word it?
- under gender and diversity, is the ombudsman the only consideration? What about the new policies such as the one that is being proposed in https://www.icann.org/public-comments/expected-standards-revisions-2016-05-1...
Adressed above and added a few.
So I hope this helps, with this I'll ask Giulia to make a new version, but keep your comments and text suggestions coming!
Best,
Niels
avri
On 21-May-16 06:07, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
On 26-May-16 10:40, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Is it in one of those environments that allows for cooperative
online work? Unfortunately not, it is made by a designer, but it would be great if a volunteer wants to reproduce this as (online) mindmap.
sure when i get a moment, probably during some conference call or other as it is is a mechancal task to transfer it, i will do it. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
So to add to the picture I am going to a conference on the role of Ombudsman in Human Rights, to add another perspective. I will write a note of what I get from this and post it Sent from my iPad
On 21/05/2016, at 6:09 PM, Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Attached a second draft visualization made by the designer, as always, looking forward to your comments!
What text is missing? What more would you like to be in here?
I was thinking (maybe too much, maybe not), we could maybe also do a dendogram based on rights. With the UDHR at the bottom, the ICCPR and the ICESCR coming from that and then all the smaller treaties following that, and finally of course the Ruggie Principles and the Global compact. This might build on the work done by Tatiana and Aarti on relevant frameworks? It defintely needs some research and lawyer touch :)
Curious to hear what you all think!
Best,
Niels <article19_ICANN_18-05.pdf> _______________________________________________ cc-humanrights-research mailing list cc-humanrights-research@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights-research
participants (9)
-
avri doria -
avri doria -
Chris LaHatte -
Karel Douglas -
Motoko Aizawa -
Niels ten Oever -
Seth Johnson -
vidushi＠cis-india.org -
Zalnieriute, Monika