On Dec 18, 2015 23:18, "Paul Twomey" <paul.twomey@argopacific.com> wrote:
It would be best to engage the Board members on the CCWG to understand
better what scenarios they identified with the language. (And I think it would be good for us to give concrete examples of actual breach of human rights within ICANN that we are concerned about - that can focus the minds/conversation)
SO: +1 to that. The IAB's comment was mute (neutral) about this, don't know if the NRO-EC will be making comment on this subject as well. Regards
Paul Twomey
On 12/19/15 1:13 AM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
It’s OK Niels, they also think that increased transparency is against
the global public interest. I infer that they think that the GPI is equivalent to whatever gives them the least amount of constraint and the greatest amount of obscured power.
To say I am disappointed in the Board is to understate the matter.
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
Paul.rosenzweig@gmail.com
+1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
Costa Rica: +506 7008 3964
Our travel blog: www.paulandkatyexcellentadventure.blogspot.com
My professional blog: www.paulrosenzweigesq.com
Link to my PGP Key
From: wp4-bounces@icann.org [mailto:wp4-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of
Niels ten Oever
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:34 AM To: wp4@icann.org Subject: Re: [Wp4] Board comments on Annex 6
Pardon me. This time with attachment.
Best,
Niels
On 18 December 2015 18:02:09 GMT+08:00, Niels ten Oever < lists@digitaldissidents.org> wrote:
Dear all,
By now you have probably all seen the comment of the board on the proposed raft report, and especially annex 6. If not please find them attached.
I have to say I was both dismayed and struck by surprise when I read the comments, but I am very curious to learn what you think.
My main feeling was that we have already addressed all points that are brought up, but again I am very curious to hear your opinion.
Finally. The biggest surprise came from the suggestion of the use of the public interest instrument, which seems to be quite far fetched to use in case of human rights. !
I can
imagine the headline: ICANN board think human rights are against the public interest.
Looking forward to hear what you all think.
All the best,
Niels
.
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________ Wp4 mailing list Wp4@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
-- Dr Paul Twomey Managing Director Argo P@cific
US Cell: +1 310 279 2366 Aust M: +61 416 238 501
www.argopacific.com
_______________________________________________ Wp4 mailing list Wp4@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4