- Wp4 - lists.icann.org

Final document discussion?
by Niels ten Oever Oct. 13, 2015

Oct. 13, 2015

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Dear all, I this email finds you well and you are all enjoying your weekend. I am emailing you because Monday is the deadline for our document to be sent to the CCWG and there seem to be a number of issues still open for discussion. I'm not sure how we will resolve those issues in a way that is agreeable for the WP before we send the document off to the CCWG. If we're going to deal with this on the list, will there be a final call for comment before we send the document of? And if so, when will this be ? So am looking for a bit of information on procedure here. If people are up for it, am happy to have a joint call / working sesion on the document around tomorrow evening 18:00 UTC to resolve remaining issues. Best, Niels - -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWGWM4AAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpfXAH/Ar41rL5uo0nlvZprXHHUMGG K6S3IeFCbQ/U4MX0eLVIiMH53otZ9kr/n5Y4hT0MuKiKF0xxlpnD9SAt8ovuzf7e Hss6S9Gq+gSizIrfB0huNn/ptCDaOzLXu8u8L0MMKxyldsR3hNRZKDWsRwNX4xQi 0wXJi4xzrfiu10drRQAO26KVRm/GozNhL4XnEXjk4iC2cfJHVr3rDFgsscv6ODqd 5POZYLRF249Eg9z8a6/oeTceXQwDxzOOgTtGvYVR2LHZaOSPYwbpprMpd2naPD2T fB8DrIUqkzo4uPbBoPgbxPwL2Rzwy8DERZ7av4YJzVUE93JjOhtkNHr3yf/WqvE= =gyC6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

14 49

Human Rights PC2 draft for CCWG comment
by León Felipe Sánchez Ambía Oct. 13, 2015

Oct. 13, 2015

Dear all, I want to thank you all for the excellent work carried in this second public comment analysis draft. Although I remained silent I followed the discussion closely and tried to capture it in some minor additions I made to this new version of our draft to be submitted to the CCWG for review. I specially thank Nigel, Niels, Tatiana, Greg, Avri, Ellen, Kavouss, David and Mathew for their work and feedback to reach this document. I encourage you to please review this version which will be submitted as our deliverable to the CCWG and I also remind you that should there be the need to make any further adjustments, we can do so anytime before having to submit a final version to be included in the next version of the CCWG’s draft proposal. Attached is a word and PDF version of this latest draft. Best regards, León

3 7

Google Doc Renovation
by Greg Shatan Oct. 8, 2015

Oct. 8, 2015

All, As discussed on today's call, I've edited and cleaned up the Google Doc, getting all the options and commentary in the Options section (while leaving a copy of any comments that were also "options" in place). I also cleaned up the formatting and added the Human Rights section from the 2nd Report on the front page. I also made a few language changes and additions, which I did in "suggest" mode. I accepted most of the prior changes in the document, but left the comments on the poll in place, since that section is still a work in progress. In terms of organization and appearance, the document is now fairly stable. This should make it easier for all of us to review and refine the text (in "suggest" mode). Enjoy! Greg

1 0

Fwd: Results of WP4 Poll
by León Felipe Sánchez Ambía Oct. 8, 2015

Oct. 8, 2015

Dear all, in anticipation for our call in a couple of hours, I am forwarding the poll results. In brief, the WP has expressed in a vast majority that No reference to a specific document should be included in the suggested bylaw text. The details on the results are below but I believe that once the first question has been answered with a majority of No’s then it is useless to continue the analysis on the rest of the questions. I suggest we now close this issue as per the polls result and focus on drafting some language that respects the outcome of the poll. Talk to you in short. Best regards, León > Inicio del mensaje reenviado: > > De: Brenda Brewer <brenda.brewer(a)icann.org> > Fecha: 8 de octubre de 2015, 8:54:16 a.m. GMT-5 > Para: "leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx" <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx> > Cc: ACCT-Staff <acct-staff(a)icann.org> > Asunto: Results of WP4 Poll > > > Question 1 - Should there be a reference to a specific document in the Bylaws text regarding human rights proposed by the CCWG (Yes or No)? > Question 2 - If a document reference is included should it be the UDHR (yes or no)? > Question 3 - If not UDHR what other document or documents should be referred to (list)? > > Results of WP4 Poll > > Q1 Yes - 5 > No - 18 > > Q2 Yes - 11 > No - 12 > > Q3 None or NA - 13 > Not Sure - 3 > > · International bill of human rights , Regional and Domestic commitments to same. > · my read is if one answers 1 and 2 with No then 3 is irrelevant. I note that some others have, however, put in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights for 3 even though they have said no to 1 and 2. > · that is be guided by the Guiding Principles on business and human rights > · The UDHR is the only instrument that is of sufficient universality. > · The UDHR is the only instrument that is of sufficient universality. > · UDHR & UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights > · UDHR & UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights > · UDHR, ICCPR, ICESCR > · UDHR, ICCPR, ICESCR > · UDHR, ICCPR, ICESCR > · UDHR, ICCPR, ICESCR > · UDHR, ICCPR, ICESCR > · UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights >

2 1

Draft analysis of the public comments: invitation to contribute
by Niels ten Oever Oct. 8, 2015

Oct. 8, 2015

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Dear all, With the deadline drawing near Tatiana and I have made new additions to the document in which the comments are summarized. This time we have provided a draft analysis of the comments in line with the 'DelBianco Postulate' as proposed by Greg (thanks for that!). We have two concrete question for additions to the document to Bernard and/or Leon: (1.) to summarize the outcomes of the poll on rights language, and (2.) to provide a language proposal for the metrics. We would like to reiterate this is a draft text, simply to help us have a constructive and productive discussions and hopefully come to good decisions on our submission to the CCWG in the call later today. Additions, contributions and corrections before the call are of course very much welcomed. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qGYKB3d2pjx0iFGj8a8lywgM7WgYqTpis_4- ldkbtg8/edit?usp=sharing or in short form: http://is.gd/wp4delbianco Best, Niels - -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWFlJQAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjp2IQH/AoUl37hIrfuZUIMDAjl40h+ CrDD15+nzVhiJnN8BgJu/UQ2HWmYQWcG9pzPnXCsADp7lIbgbZgeQCi5zaBsnLjK XicUFqFzHEozwuaMjXkK4Vr/KtvNzSMYbE+JOdDdbPrd6eEtnTHUiblsf3iEn9VQ hNESEtts3w/V4QqvmE8Xcsaf9KJNH3gthjKp7Tit9FCAsESeD5zQMZZUOCE5LBP2 roiBGaaOBDqZ0rX5bJr/XOKrvFcEZTpR0TLCqGMrwlC0sogPa1UeeTynCyRp8muz Ms+UNE8rgR3CEOA9NTWEjioXvzch0EjGz/MjODgyqYUF3m7OVP+c9rgV4cFeenQ= =RAok -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

CCWG - WP4 Poll on referencing existing documents
by Bernard Turcotte Oct. 8, 2015

Oct. 8, 2015

All, Following today's WP4 it was decided to poll the WP4 participants on the subject of referring to existing human rights instruments or not. Please complete the following by 23:59 UTC Wednesday October 7th 2015 by replying to the WP4 list: - Question 1 - Should there be a reference to a specific document in the Bylaws text regarding human rights proposed by the CCWG (Yes or No)? - Question 2 - If a document reference is included should it be the UDHR (yes or no)? - Question 3 - If not UDHR what other document or documents should be referred to (list)? Thank you. Staff for Leon Sanchez.

26 31

Re: [Wp4] CCWG - WP4 Poll on referencing existing documents
by ram.mohan Oct. 7, 2015

Oct. 7, 2015

1. No 2. N/A 3. N/A Adding something like this has potent impact on IANA, not simply ICANN in a naming and policy function. Also see Sam Eisner's rationale. Any such suggestion should be run past the IETF and RIRs. Ram -------- Original message -------- From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard(a)gmail.com> Date:10/06/2015 8:10 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wp4(a)icann.org Subject: [Wp4] CCWG - WP4 Poll on referencing existing documents All, Following today's WP4 it was decided to poll the WP4 participants on the subject of referring to existing human rights instruments or not. Please complete the following by 23:59 UTC Wednesday October 7th 2015 by replying to the WP4 list: Question 1 - Should there be a reference to a specific document in the Bylaws text regarding human rights proposed by the CCWG (Yes or No)? Question 2 - If a document reference is included should it be the UDHR (yes or no)? Question 3 - If not UDHR what other document or documents should be referred to (list)? Thank you. Staff for Leon Sanchez.

6 8

Fwd: [WP1] Updated analysis of public comments on bringing AoC into the bylaws
by Greg Shatan Oct. 6, 2015

Oct. 6, 2015

Here is an example of the "DelBianco Postulate." Greg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org> Date: Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:54 AM Subject: [WP1] Updated analysis of public comments on bringing AoC into the bylaws To: "wp1(a)icann.org" <wp1(a)icann.org>, Jordan Carter <jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz > Cc: Becky Burr <becky.burr(a)neustar.biz>, Thomas Rickert <thomas(a)rickert.net>, ACCT-Staff <acct-staff(a)icann.org>, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez < carlosraulg(a)gmail.com> Members of WP1: Attached is an update (v3) of the analysis of public comments on bringing the Affirmation of Commitments into the ICANN bylaws. The update reflects discussion on our Monday call, plus edits from Rinalia, plus my expansion of an issue that was also discussed on Monday’s WP2 call — requiring implementation of review recommendations before opening next round of gTLDs. We are hoping to discuss on second half of today’s WP1 call at 19 UTC > > From: <wp1-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Jordan Carter > Date: Monday, October 5, 2015 at 7:03 AM > To: "wp1(a)icann.org", ACCT-Staff > Subject: [WP1] WP1 Agenda Items and Volunteer Groups - Updated > > Hi all > > Here is an update to volunteers on analysing the public comments, followed > by outline agendas for our next two calls. > > I noted just now in closing we may need another call to close out this > work. Let me give notice now that if we do, the only window that can work > is *Friday 09 October 2015 at 1730-1930 UTC.* Staff, please send out a > tentative invite to that call window, in case we need it. > > > Our immediate task is to analyse public comments and recommend amended > proposals and/or choices for the CCWG to consider, by 12-Oct. These will be > considered at the CCWG meeting in Dublin on Friday 16 October. > > Within WP1 we have 8 distinct groups working on this public comment > analyses. > > Here are the currently known volunteers. Please advise if you wish to join > in any of the groups. > > *Budget, strat plan, op plan* --> Jonathan Zuck, Cherine Chalaby, Carlos >> Raul Gutierrez, Mary Uduma, Asha Hemrajani >> >> *Standard Bylaws* --> Keith Drazek, James Gannon, Chris Disspain >> >> *Fundamental Bylaws* --> Keith Drazek, James Gannon, Chris Disspain >> >> *Individual Director removal* --> Mike Chartier, Robin Gross, Alan >> Greenberg, Erika Mann, Cherine Chalaby >> >> *Board removal* --> Greg Shatan, Alan Greenberg, George Sadowsky >> >> *AoC* --> Steve DelBianco, Carlos Raul Gutierrez, Alan Greenberg, Rinalia >> Abdul Rahim >> >> *Community forum* --> Jordan Carter, Matthew Shears, Jorge >> Cancio, Gonzalo Navarro >> >> *CMSM* --> Avri Doria, Robin Gross, Steve DelBianco, Jorge Cancio, >> Samantha Eisner, Alan Greenberg, Ram Mohan, Kavouss Arasteh >> > > > > *Here are the tentative agenda items for the coming calls:* > > *WP1 — Tues 6 Oct - 19h-21h UTC* > > * New Public Comment analyses:* > > - Fundamental Bylaws and Regular Bylaws (Keith) > - Individual Director Removal (Mike and Robin) > > *Review of previous discussions where required:* > > - AoC > - Board Removal > > > *WP1 — Thur 8 Oct - 05h-07h UTC* > > > * New Public Comment analyses: * > > - Community Forum (Matthew) > - CMSM (Avri and Robin) > > *Review of previous discussions where required:* > > - Fundamental and Regular Bylaws > - Individual Director removal > - Budget > > > best, > Jordan > > Jordan Carter > Rapporteur, Work Party 1 (Community Empowerment) > Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN's Accountability (CCWG) > > _______________________________________________ WP1 mailing list WP1(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1

1 0

Zuck Model for Human Rights comments on 2nd CCWG draft report
by Niels ten Oever Oct. 6, 2015

Oct. 6, 2015

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Dear all, I hope this email finds you well. In order to fulfill our tasks as volunteers Tatiana and I have tried to categorize the comments on the second draft CCWG draft report concerning human rights in the Zuck-model . https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qGYKB3d2pjx0iFGj8a8lywgM7WgYqTpis_4- ldkbtg8/edit?usp=sharing We hope this can be the basis or at least a contribution to a constructive discussion in our call in about 1.5 hour. Best, Niels - -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWFC6/AAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpj5UIAJ56c2Tg9HF6c5arcj1NM6hL 8EKWUR0g0GM0rYoaMYMUoiw3HbzxCVW6iAkGqH0NRRZs5UEPn84SqCSdeinCvRMp ldho7tCmUpbv5CZBP4Z/dvsuurvG6IJgvZwXPaT6KhaT8ybSuWtNEHxZACgZGRNP KAMmP8OWVSvLE+Thdrm+UnxNEydaCpc3O9RQnmsvLbxnf7zo0om/hPSOTxrW4Ynu OYRRwbM9dXprKDrSCL7qTNFG0aYerjjbsFT7veU+FXf4KfMqqIbET0Xla8cuRC17 5+C8uAodIhEodCGdxt7AU/Pjtq+E2rMFC8AUH1ur2wNAlS8tD1v0U45GlqQmoOA= =3vCm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 3

Doodle poll for WP4 Meeting on 6 October
by Brenda Brewer Oct. 2, 2015

Oct. 2, 2015

Please respond to the Doodle poll for the another WP4 Meeting on 6 October. Please respond in a timely manner so the meeting details can be sent out ASAP. Doodle Link: http://doodle.com/poll/9rvezn37nffp47xh Thank you all kindly! Brenda

1 0