On 4/19/16, 19:46 , "owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of Heather
Forrest" <owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of
Heather.Forrest@acu.edu.au> wrote:

I am grateful for the work to date of the small team and do not in any
way wish to downplay their efforts, but I too agree with Paul - very well
put.

Best wishes,

Heather

________________________________________
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org <owner-council@gnso.icann.org> on
behalf of Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 9:46
To: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G.; policy@paulmcgrady.com
Cc: Stephanie Perrin; council@gnso.icann.org
Subject: RE: [council] For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:
ICANN Harassment Policy

There has been some discussion of harassment policy within the BC, and
the prevailing view is that a draft policy is best developed by legal
experts in this sensitive area and then put out for public comment prior
to finalization and adoption.

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/Cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]
On Behalf Of Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G.
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 6:45 PM
To: policy@paulmcgrady.com
Cc: Stephanie Perrin; council@gnso.icann.org
Subject: Re: [council] For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:
ICANN Harassment Policy

I want to restate my +1 to Paul´s comments very specifically on the way
he has phrased some issues questions

I guess I have my doubts in general about this being the role of the
GNSO Council.
me too

Clearly, this is an important issue which affects all members of the
ICANN community, and not just members of the GNSO.
exactly

Wouldn't a simple letter (1) making note of the event, (2) making note
of the lack of a clear policy, and (3) asking the Board to launch a
CCWG to address this issue (if the Board believes that it and Staff
together cannot or should not for some reason), be sufficient?  I just
don't see how the Council should be in the business of making specific
policy recommendations without a policy process.
see under ³picket fence²

The Council is not a legislative body - our role is to play traffic
cop to grass roots movements, right?
thats the way I see it and why I added my +1
Thanks, and sorry if I am missing something here!
I miss clear guidelines from the Corporation on engagement rules for
participants in f2f meetings (like the ones we have in adobe connect
rooms).

Carlos Raul Gutierrez

Best,
Paul

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fwd: Re: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram
Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy
From: Stephanie Perrin
<[stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca](mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.uto
ronto.ca)>
Date: Wed, April 06, 2016 1:31 pm
To: "[council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:council@gnso.icann.org)"<[council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:council@gnso.icann.org)>

and one more time....
SP

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:
Re: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:
ICANN Harassment Policy
Date:
Wed, 6 Apr 2016 16:28:01 -0400
From:
Stephanie Perrin
[<stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.uto
ronto.ca)
To:
Jennifer Gore Standiford
[<JStandiford@web.com>](mailto:JStandiford@web.com), James M. Bladel
[<jbladel@godaddy.com>](mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com), Austin, Donna
[<Donna.Austin@neustar.biz>](mailto:Donna.Austin@neustar.biz), Phil
Corwin [<psc@vlaw-dc.com>](mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com), GNSO Council List
[<council@gnso.icann.org>](mailto:council@gnso.icann.org)

I am sorry to be late with my feedback.  This is a great effort so
far, but I must say I find it a wee bit over the top.  Let me explain
why:

  * The list of offensive (inappropriate of unwanted) conduct is
exhaustive but not necessarily helpful.  "at a minimum" needs to go,
as Phil has pointed out.  The problem in harassment policies in my
view arises in the matter of how to determine "offensive" now
"inappropriate", particularly across cultures.  It would be more
helpful to expand on this, explaining the cross-cultural nature of
ICANN and give guidance on how to conduct oneself
_tentatively_.....eg. if you are Dutch and in the habit of greeting
people with three kisses, ask first.  I don't think we want to shut
down normal gestures of familiarity and affection, but maybe we
do....it is worth a discussion.  The other part that needs to go
unless you want us all to be tied into legal quandries is this: "or
any other category protected by any applicable governing law". What
are the laws of Finland on public deportment, discrimination, etc.
?  Where do we go next, how do I check the laws there?  I don't find
this helpful. If you are going to include language like this, we will
have to have the already burdened Constituency Travel send out
advisories:  eg.  When in Turkey, do not make jokes about Ataturk as
it is forbidden by law,  etc. etc.
  * There needs to be a section discussing the rights of the accused,
and their rights to confidentiality.  It is my view that we need a
privacy policy more than a harassment policy, because I feel that
inappropriate conduct is in fact already covered by our acceptable
conduct policy, but here we are anyway.  The accused has a right to
have investigations conducted properly, and in confidence in my view,
so how that is going to take place, who does them, when the accuser is
permitted to go public,etc. needs quite a bit of work.
  * "By participating in an ICANN conference, you agree to prohibit
harassment....."
I actually think we should not demand that anyone who agrees to
participate in an ICANN conference should have to agree to take on the
role of enforcer of a harassment policy.  Further on this:
  *        "You shall report any actions that you believe may violate
our policy no matter how slight the actions might seem".
This is not necessary.  Anyone who experiences harassment ought to be
capable of determining themselves whether there was abuse, let us not
invite people to interfere with other people's jokes unless those
jokes are offending them, the listener.  In other words, I take no
offence at Michele N calling me a crazy tree-hugger, and I really
don't want to be dragged into Chris Lahatte's office to discuss it
just because someone overheard it and felt I ought to be offended.
Now if they are offended, (eg. they are a tree-hugger and are offended
at the suggestion that I ought to be considered in that group) they
can make their own complaint and leave me out of it.  In a policy such
as this, one has to be quite careful about how wide one opens the
door.
However, thanks to all who worked on this, it is very difficult to
craft a good harassment policy and enforcement mechanism, and my hat
is off to you on efforts so far. I would also like to apologize to
anyone whom I have either touched or kissed hello over the three
years I have been attending ICANN.  I meant no harm, I spent too much
time in Montreal (where we kiss everybody only twice) and I will
strive to be more guarded in future.

I spent a year working in our central agency in the Canadian
Government, working on the ethics code and a limited time also on
evaluating workplace wellness (including harassment) policies and
implementation in the departments.  I like the Canadian approach, and
offer you the link here:
[](http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/index-eng.asp)[

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/index-eng.asp](http:/
/www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/index-eng.asp).
In particular, the tools that help evaluate whether an act
constitutes harassment I think are useful:
[](http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/mibh-sjh-eng.as

p)[http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/mibh-sjh-eng.asp](
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/mibh-sjh-eng.asp).
They put an emphasis on the activity needing to be repeated, or one
action to be extreme...this may be more applicable in a workplace
environment but I think the tests are nevertheless relevant.

Cheers Stephanie Perrin

On 2016-04-06 15:00, Jennifer Gore Standiford wrote:
James and Colleagues,
Thanks to Donna and Phil for their constructive feedback. With that,
please review and provide any additional feedback based on  the
revised draft ŒICANN Conference Harassment  Key Points for
Consideration¹.

The attached addresses the following feedback received thus far,  in
particular:

Are Dr Crocker and the other Board members covered under the ICANN
staff policy on Sexual Harassment or would they be covered under a
community ICANN attendee policy?
Included the following sentence: ŒThe term ³ICANN Conference
Attendees² includes event registered and non-registered participants,
sponsors, contractors, consultants, staff and board members.¹

This very extensive list of potential offenses being non-exclusive
(indicated by the words ³At a minimum² that start the document)
Removed term ³ At a minimum²

The use of the modifier ³Offensive² at the start of sections 1-4, in
that this subjective standard inevitably raises the question
³offensive to whom²? In this regard, I think there must be some
element of intent to harass or demean in the behavior subject to
sanction, and that any policy should recognize that the cultural
diversity of ICANN meeting attendees may lead to situations where
remarks that are not intended to offend may nonetheless do so.
Replaced the word Œ offensive¹ with Œunwanted¹ or Œinappropriate¹

A need to strictly define, and limit, the ³prompt, appropriate
remedial action² that ICANN staff may take if they determine that
harassment has occurred (as well as whether ICANN staff are the
appropriate parties to undertake such investigations, and whether the
investigatory and judgmental/sanctioning roles should be separate).
Change verbiage to state ŒICANN staff is required toŠ¹ instead of
Œmay¹

Contradictory language regarding whether an individual who believes
that he/she has witnessed harassment should report it, or must report
it.
Change the verbiage to sake of consistency. Opted for Œshould/shall¹
vs. Œrequired/will¹

The outstanding questions that James has outline should remain
included in the GNSO letter to ensure each item is addressed.

Thanks
Jennifer

**From:** James M. Bladel
[[mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com](mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com)]
**Sent:** Wednesday, April 06, 2016 1:57 PM
**To:** Jennifer Gore Standiford; Austin, Donna; Phil Corwin; GNSO
Council List
**Subject:** Re: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:
ICANN Harassment Policy
Thanks Jennifer, Phil and Donna for weighing in.

Perhaps the concern is that we¹ve called this document a ³draft²
but it too closely resembles a finished policy.  I believe (and I
think Jennifer¹s note confirms) that this was intended to start a
dialogue in whatever subsequent group addresses this work, and a
mechanism for relaying GNSO ideas, questions and concerns in to that
effort.

I appreciate the discussion, and hope that we can all get to a place
where we¹re either comfortable with the draft, or we amend it, or
substitute it with something else.

Thanks‹

**From:** Jennifer Standiford
<[JStandiford@web.com](mailto:JStandiford@web.com)>
**Date:** Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 12:46
**To:** "Austin, Donna"
<[](<[](mailto:Donna.Austin@neustar.biz)[Donna.Austin@neustar.biz](mailt
o:Donna.Austin@neustar.biz)>, Phil Corwin
<[psc@vlaw-dc.com](mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com)>, James Bladel
<[jbladel@godaddy.com](mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com)>, GNSO Council
List <[council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:council@gnso.icann.org)>
**Subject:** RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:
ICANN Harassment Policy
Hi Phil and Colleagues,

Just a friendly reminder the attached document that was put forth in
the GNSO Letter to Akram was referred to as a draft. James also
included several questions that remain unanswered that will need to be
address in addition to the points that you and Donna have raised.  As
for Donna¹s specific question, I would anticipate that ICANN
Conference Participants would be a defined term that would include all
ICANN staff and board members.

Jennifer

**From:**
[owner-council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org)
[[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann
.org)]
**On Behalf Of** Austin, Donna
**Sent:** Wednesday, April 06, 2016 1:36 PM
**To:** Phil Corwin; James M. Bladel; GNSO Council List
**Subject:** [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram
Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy
Hi Phil

It¹s a good point and also raises another one for me. Are Dr Crocker
and the other Board members covered under the ICANN staff policy on
Sexual Harassment or would they be covered under a community ICANN
attendee policy?

Donna

**From:**[](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org)[owner-council@gnso.ic
ann.org](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org)
[[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann
.org)]
**On Behalf Of** Phil Corwin
**Sent:** Wednesday, 6 April 2016 9:33 AM
**To:** James M. Bladel
<[](<[](mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com)[jbladel@godaddy.com](mailto:jbladel@
godaddy.com)>;
GNSO Council List
<[council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:council@gnso.icann.org)>
**Subject:** [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram
Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy
Thinking about this a bit more  how would this incident be treated
under any proposed Harassment Policy?

[](http://domainincite.com/18772-icann-53-launches-with-risky-caitlyn-
jenner-joke)[http://domainincite.com/18772-icann-53-launches-with-risk
y-caitlyn-jenner-joke](http://domainincite.com/18772-icann-53-launches
-with-risky-caitlyn-jenner-joke)

Some found it offensive, and an apology was issued by Chairman
Crocker. Is that sufficient or would reporting and investigation be
required?

**Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal** **Virtualaw LLC**
**1155 F Street, NW**
**Suite 1050**
**Washington, DC 20004**
**202-559-8597/Direct**
**202-559-8750/Fax**
**202-255-6172/Cell**
** **
**Twitter: @VlawDC**

**_"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey_**

**From:** Phil Corwin
**Sent:** Wednesday, April 06, 2016 12:07 PM
**To:** 'James M. Bladel'; GNSO Council List
**Subject:** RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:
ICANN Harassment Policy
Colleagues:

I support in principle sending a letter to Akram on this subject and
establishing clearer, enforceable policies regarding sexual and other
forms of harassment that may take place at ICANN meetings.

However, while I am strongly opposed to any form of such harassment, I
have some concerns about the proposed draft Harassment Policy,
relating to:
·         This very extensive list of potential offenses being
non-exclusive (indicated by the words ³At a minimum² that start the
document) ·         The use of the modifier ³Offensive² at the start
of sections 1-4, in that this subjective standard inevitably raises
the question ³offensive to whom²? In this regard, I think there must
be some element of intent to harass or demean in the behavior subject
to sanction, and that any policy should recognize that the cultural
diversity of ICANN meeting attendees may lead to situations where
remarks that are not intended to offend may nonetheless do so.
·         A need to strictly define, and limit, the ³prompt,
appropriate remedial action² that ICANN staff may take if they
determine that harassment has occurred (as well as whether ICANN staff
are the appropriate parties to undertake such investigations, and
whether the investigatory and judgmental/sanctioning roles should be
separate).
·         Contradictory language regarding whether an individual who
believes that he/she has witnessed harassment should report it, or
must report it.

I look forward to engaging in a discussion of these matters on our
call of April 14th.

Best regards, Philip

**Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal** **Virtualaw LLC**
**1155 F Street, NW**
**Suite 1050**
**Washington, DC 20004**
**202-559-8597/Direct**
**202-559-8750/Fax**
**202-255-6172/Cell**
** **
**Twitter: @VlawDC**

**_"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey_**

**From:**[](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org)[owner-council@gnso.ic
ann.org](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org)
[[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann
.org)]
**On Behalf Of** James M. Bladel
**Sent:** Monday, April 04, 2016 7:46 PM
**To:** GNSO Council List
**Subject:** [council] For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah
re: ICANN Harassment Policy
Council Colleagues ‹

Attached and copied below, please find a draft letter from the Council
to Akram Atallah, in response to his recent blog post (³Conduct at
ICANN Meetings²

[](https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings)[https://www
.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings](https://www.icann.org/new
s/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings)).

In this note, I set out to make some high-level points that support
further work in this area, without weighing in on any specific
indecent.  Also, the letter references a statement from the NCUC ExCom
(³Statement from NCUC Executive Committee²
[](http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html
)[http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html]
(http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html))
and the ICANN Harassment Policy drafted by our volunteers (attached),
and urges any future effort to consider these materials.

If possible, please review these documents prior to our next call on
14 APR.  We can collect edits and then decide if/how we want to
proceed.

Thank you,

J.

* * *

Akram Atallah
COO and interim CEO, ICANN

Dear Akram 

On behalf of the GNSO Council, we would like to thank your for your
recent blog post (³Conduct at ICANN Meetings²).  Members of the
Council, and all of the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies,
share the goal of ensuring that all members of the community can
participate in and contribute to ICANN, in an environment where
harassment and discrimination are not tolerated.

Without passing judgment on any specific incident, we are encouraged
by the commitment from Staff and the Board to engage the community on
this subject.
In support of this, volunteers on the Council have prepared a draft
(³ICANN Conference Harassment Policy², attached). Several questions
remain open, however, including:

?         Whether this Policy would enhance, or be distinct from, the
existing Expected Standards of Behavior policy ?         Whether
complaints would be reported to ICANN Staff, or the Office of the
Ombudsman, or some other entity or group ?         How the policy will
be enforced, and ?         Other topics and questions that will arise
from this work.

We expect that members of the GNSO community will be engaged in this
effort, and note that some have already undertaken work in their own
groups (³Statement from NUCU Executive Committee²).  We urge this
group to consider these materials in any community undertaking to
develop new policy addressing this issue.

Thank you

Donna Austin, GNSO Vice-Chair
James Bladel, GNSO Chair
Heather Forrest, GNSO Vice-Chair

[](https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings)[https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings](https://www.icann.o
rg/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings)

[](http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html
)[http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html]
(http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html)

* * *
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG -
[www.avg.com](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ww
w.avg.com&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr5
6eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&
s=Wc6g-4Lo0XrpvCus6DBuVDgfsaHZUFkJkS6hjLLPAak&e=)
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11942 - Release Date:
04/02/16
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/12005 - Release Date:
04/10/16 Internal Virus Database is out of date.