- Ws2-hr - lists.icann.org

Proposed Agenda Call Sept 6 19:00 UTC
by Niels ten Oever Sept. 6, 2016

Sept. 6, 2016

Dear all, Please find underneath and attached the proposed agenda for our call of Sept 6 19:00 UTC. Also please find attached a rather advanced version of the document mentioned under agenda point 2, the summary of the Human Rights work under Workstream 1. 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 2. Discussion on: the Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… 3. Discussion on: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_… 4. Discussion on FoI draft document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1emqmzyB9_0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVnkBYUO… 5. AOB ICANN staff informed me that they are working on providing more real time collaboration methods, but currently they do not offer such services. So until that time I am afraid we are stuck with Google Docs. As always feel free to suggest addition or changes to the points above. 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

4 5

Notes, recordings and transcript for WS2 Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #3 | 30 August
by MSSI Secretariat Sept. 5, 2016

Sept. 5, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Human Resources Subgroup Meeting #3 -30 August 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/CxKsAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc * Dan Appleman phone only * Nigel Roberts - excuses. 2. Discussion on: the Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… * Tatiana Tropina: no progress this week. Will simply add the text from the WS1 Final report. * Niels ten Oever: Hope to complete this document next week. 3. Discussion on: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_… * Niels ten Oever: Given the sad news from Paul Twomey there has been no progress as expected. It would be great if we could keep adding concerns to this doc. * Tatiana Tropina: I have been going through teh records on the calls and chats to put them into the concerns doc but I am waiting for Paul because he was supposed to lead this one. but once Paul is back I will be ready with info :) 4. Discussion on: FoI draft document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1emqmzyB9_0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVnkBYUO… * Niels ten Oever: Should the Framework be a core value? We should ask this of ICANN legal as to what the implications of being core value imply. does nayone have an issue with this - no. * Paul McGrady: Seems like we would want to ask the community that, rather than the lawyers. * Tatiana Tropina: So basically you want to ask ICANN legal about this as a starting point for our further discussion? * Kavous Arateh: views of lawyers should not be priveleged, everyone has input. * Anne Aikman-Scalese: have no issue with asking ICANN legal. Still unclear what a human rights policy vs policy development activities in ICANN. Would such a human rights policy imply that ICANN would have to make a human rights assessment of the propose registry before contracting to delegate a TLD? * Niels ten Oever: you should include these in the document. * Tatiana Tropina: ICANN legal added the term core value and we should ask them why they did so. * Niels ten Oever: any views on this? * Paul McGrady: Agree. I'd like to know why they made that unilateral change, but I don't think we need them to define "core" for us. * Farzaneh Badii: Let us find out who suggested using Core Value. * Daniel Appelman: I disagree with separating policy from operations. That would weaken any human rights commitment we recommend as a policy matter. Operations should be consistent with policy. * Niels Ten Oever: Will ask staff to pass on this question to ICANN legal - ACTION ITEM. Niels ten Oever: Question to ICANN legal: 'What is the rationale for the addition of 'core values' to the ICANN bylaws, and what are its legal and non-legal implications in your opinion, especially for the human rights bylaw? * Niels Ten Oever: What is meant by International Human Rights? I have pasted several refernces in the document which could help with this. * Tatiana Tropina: Uncertain that these instruments which are applicable to states are not applicable to ICANN. They can help shape of things for ICANN. * Kavous Arasteh: We should go through these and see which parts could apply to ICANN. * Tatiana Tropina: I think Kavouss misunderstood me Of course we should go through them I was clear about this. I am more than up for going through all the conventions. * Anne Aikman-Scalese: to what parts of ICANN should Human rights apply? It would certainly include awarding a TLD. We should identify policies and procedures and activities in ICANN which would be subject to HR. * Paul McGrady: starting with the principles and then look at how they apply is my approach - but we should end up in the same place. * Markus Kummer: The Board was very worried about unintended consequences. the baseline for ICANN will probably remain the Rugge principals and which ones apply and see where we can go from there. * Avri Doria: an explicit exhaustive list of operations? * Anne Aikman-Scalese: @AVri - no - just certain test examples - how do Human Rights principles apply to specific activities of ICANN - a practical application of principles in certain examples of ICANN's operations. * Tatiana Tropina: I think there has been some job done on this at the CCWP on human rights which might be interesting to look at, Niels, do you have anything to share on this? * Matthew Shears: I would turn that around Ann and suggest that we need to look at ICANN's operations and determine very realistically and cautiously what might apply or not. * Matthew Shears: this should not be about trying to see what fits - but rather what is appropriate - measured against other orgs and institutions perhaps * Farzaneh Badii: What we need to consider what is in ICANN's scope. Does this imply that there are going to be contractual provisions for Human Rights in registry agreements? I think the ICANN responsability stops at the string level (unclear what is meant by string level). * Kavous Arasteh: Seems chair is unfair in analysing comments by particpants. * Anne Aikman-Scalese: @Niels - I think the document you linked presupposes a negative impact on Human Rights in all cases. For example, it states that there is a "right to use all words and names in domain names". There is actually no such right and the entire scheme of trademark protection for the new gTLDs demonstrates the balancing of freedom of expression against the right of the artistic community to protect its artistic creations. This is Article 19 versus Article 27 UDHR balancing. ARticle 27 says: (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author. * Niels ten Oever: We will discuss this on the list. We should go on to the issue of Applicable Law. Do we want to relay this to the Jurisdiction sub-group. * Kavouss Arasteh: Leave to the Jurisdiction sub-group., * Niels ten Oever: Will contact Jursidiction to advise we will wait on their results regarding this. * Anne Aikman-Scalese 2: ICANN Legal should be asked what Human Rights Law is applicable to ICANN operations. * Niels ten Oever: 2. 'What Human Rights Laws and/or Guidelines is or are applicable to which ICANN operations.' * Anne Aikman-Scalese 2: should this be tgwo separate questions. Which laws and then guidelines. * Daniel Appelman: Getting the views of legal counsel is ok; but our own work this week should be to think about all relevant ICANN operations and activities and then discuss what human rights are implicated by them. Via mailing list and comments in the document. 5. AOB

1 0

Re: [Ws2-hr] When should ICANN uphold human rights?
by farzaneh badii Sept. 4, 2016

Sept. 4, 2016

This is the ws2 on human rights! On 4 Sep 2016 10:15 p.m., "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> wrote: Dear Mr.Rosenzweig, You referred to my name and obliged me to respond to you I am sorry to hear such language being used by you. I know you very well and aware that whatever I say you immediately and categorically disagree with it. You have done it during CCWG WS1. However, I do not mind if you take a hostile position against me. Having said that , this subgroup is not mandated propose to change to the Bylaws, this Groups is merely responsible for accountability of SOs/ACs . You can raise your questions in the Human Rights sub group. I disagree that this group dealing with accountabilities of SOs/ ACs gets involved in the issue of " Framework for Interpretation of Human Rights” Redards Arasteh 2016-09-04 21:43 GMT+02:00 Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com>: > I accept Tijani’s amendment. My use of “only” was overstated – there will > be many subsidiary and subsequent questions. I think, however, that this > list identifies the basic two-part outline of the inquiry and that > Farzaneh’s questions both are important subsidiary questions to the general > question B) about “when.” > > > > As for Kavous’s suggestion that in discussion these the group is seeking > to “modify the Bylaws” which is outside its Terms of Reference that’s just > silly. This is a WG to talk about implementation of the new bylaw. I > imagine, however, that if the group thinks a bylaw modification is > necessary (unlikely, but plausible, I suppose) it can make that suggestion > and then the CCWG can agree or not, and propose to the Board who can, > likewise, agree or not and seek the agreement of the EC, or not. It’s a > standard tactic to try to limit discussion by saying something is out of > bounds – especially at the outset. > > > > Another such tactic is to say that a question is not understood – when, of > course, it is readily understandabe. For example, in response to > Farzaneh’s original questions I would support giving consideration to HR > generally in the formulation of contracts with registrars and registries > (IF we agree on what those HR are) but I would be reluctant to have ICANN > force enforcement. > > > > I say this not to discuss the specifics, but simply to make clear that > Farzaneh’s questions are perfectly understandable and clearly formulated. > > > > Paul > > > > Paul Rosenzweig > > paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com > > O: +1 (202) 547-0660 > > M: +1 (202) 329-9650 > > VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 > > www.redbranchconsulting.com > > My PGP Key: http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/ > > > > *From:* Tijani BEN JEMAA [mailto:tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn] > *Sent:* Sunday, September 4, 2016 2:13 PM > *To:* Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com> > *Cc:* farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii(a)gmail.com>; Kavouss Arasteh < > kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com>; ws2-hr(a)icann.org > > *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-hr] When should ICANN uphold human rights? > > > > Dear all, > > I agree with Paul that among the main questions for us to come up with a > Frame of Interpretation of the Human Rights in the ICANN mission would be: > > - What substance we see in the phrase human rights inside ICANN > Mission? > - When, if ever, ICANN should give that substance (whatever it > may be) effect? > > I can’t say they are the only meaningful questions since there will be > subsequent questions. But let’s start with the first question: I think that > to address it, we may begin by giving practical easy cases. > > The protection of the registrant data is one of the most obvious case of > human right that falls in the ICANN mission. This may also affect the ICANN > contract with registries/registrars > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ----------------- > > *Tijani BEN JEMAA* > > Executive Director > > Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*) > > Phone: +216 98 330 114 > > +216 52 385 114 > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ----------------- > > > > > > Le 4 sept. 2016 à 18:24, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchcons > ulting.com> a écrit : > > > > Dear Farzaneh > > > > Of course your questions are meaningful. Indeed, the ONLY two meaningful > questions in this discussion are a) what substance we see in the phrase > human rights? And b) When, if ever, ICANN should give that substance > (whatever it may be) effect? > > > > Your questions clearly go to the later of these two issues. Members of > the group may disagree on the answers we reach, but you’re asking questions > that have real meaning – whatever anyone may say to the contrary. > > > > Paul > > > > Paul Rosenzweig > > paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com > > O: +1 (202) 547-0660 > > M: +1 (202) 329-9650 > > VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 > > www.redbranchconsulting.com > > My PGP Key: http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/ > > > > *From:* ws2-hr-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org > <ws2-hr-bounces(a)icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *farzaneh badii > *Sent:* Sunday, September 4, 2016 11:56 AM > *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> > *Cc:* ws2-hr(a)icann.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-hr] When should ICANN uphold human rights? > > > > Calling something "not meaningful" is very easy. But it does not devalue > its merits, fortunately. Please provide a rationale for why the questions > are not meaningful. I don't have to consult with the co-chairs to discuss > the questions here. If the group feels that it is unnecessary to discuss > these questions they can simply not respond, if they feel we should > re-formulate them, then we can. > > > > The questions are to clarify what we mean by ICANN should not become a > content regulator. The discussions that can arise responding to the > question and sub-questions which I have posted can lead us towards a more > tangible understanding of what we mean when we say ICANN should not become > a content regulator and should not go out of its scope and mission when > upholding human rights. > > > > Best > > > > Farzaneh > > > > On 4 September 2016 at 17:34, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > Dear All, > > I do not understand the meaning and purpose of these questions. > > Perhaps the author of the questions could consult other two co chairs and > come up with meaningfull text. > > We can not send out these questions at all > > Reagrds > > Kavouss > > > > 2016-09-04 14:25 GMT+02:00 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii(a)gmail.com>: > > Hi all, > > > > Sorry for sending out the questions late. I wanted to provide a gist of > what we discussed during our call and then provide the questions but > unfortunately, we still do not have the recording. Below are some questions > for the group to discuss: > > > > > > Considering ICANN's scope and mission, when should ICANN uphold human > rights? > > > > - In its consideration to enter into contracts with registries and > registrars? (for example, when they are considering a new gTLD application) > > > > - During the contractual relationship with the registries and the > registrars by obligating the registries and registrars to enforce human > rights? > > > > > > > > > > > > Best > > > > > > -- > > Farzaneh > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-hr mailing list > Ws2-hr(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr > > > > > > > > -- > > Farzaneh > > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-hr mailing list > Ws2-hr(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr > > >

2 1

proposed agenda call August 30 19 UTC + request
by Niels ten Oever Aug. 29, 2016

Aug. 29, 2016

Dear all, Please all find underneath and attached the proposed agenda for our call tomorrow. Also a reminder that you're very much invited to contribute to and review the documents mentioned below. 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 2. Discussion on: the Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… 3. Discussion on: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_… 4. Discussion on: FoI draft document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1emqmzyB9_0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVnkBYUO… 5. AOB 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

1 0

Working documents for coming days
by Niels ten Oever Aug. 25, 2016

Aug. 25, 2016

Dear all, I've opened up a new working document as agreed at our call Tuesday. I've populated it with links to our working and background documents as well as with the questions we agreed on answering during our first call. I am looking forward to your drafting in this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1emqmzyB9_0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVnkBYUO… Of course we're also still working on the 'Human Rights in WS1 Summary'-document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… And if people have concerns about negative or unintended impacts of the HR bylaw or FoI, they can list them here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_… I'm looking forward to your contributions and our discussion coming Tuesday at 19:00 UTC. 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

1 0

Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Human Resources Subgroup Meeting #2 - 23 August
by MSSI Secretariat Aug. 24, 2016

Aug. 24, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Human Resources Subgroup Meeting #2 - 23 August 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/DgKsAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes 1. Administrivia 2. Discussion on: the Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 [0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… * Tatiana and Greg walk through of the first Google document - Summary of WS1 (WP4) discussion on Human Rights 1st draft * Greg Shatan: ICANN will enforce their contracts -- but I don't believe there are requirements relating to human rights (beyond "applicable law' provisions). * Nigel: Disagree. Because human rights conventions are not applicable to ICANN as it's not a state actor * jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): as for the meaning and effect of article 4 about international law and HR: perhaps an analysis of IRP decisions (and maybe other instances as well) could be warranted, in order to have a clear picture as to what extent HR (based on current article 4 of the Articles of Incorporation) have already been applied? * Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): Ruggie principles state that business (ie. ICANN) should "not contribute to" human rights abuses. (See page 21.) Of course for some, this may conflict with what they see as their free speech rights. For example, the Hague Criminal Court had testimony yesterday from the perpetrator of crimes of destruction of cultural property in Mali. This destruction resulted from ISIL occupation and its statement against the culture in Mali that it viewed as heretical. These videos are accessible on certain Internet sites. If ICANN permits sites to be used to show destruction of cultural property - or in a more extreme case, to permit authorized Internet urls to be used to display beheadings, is ICANN contributing to human rights violations and failing to respect Human Rights? * Niels ten Oever 2: Hi Anne - I think representation on an act and an act is a very different thing. * Nigel: Moreover, respect for human rihghts involve a positive oblgation to carry out the balancing act between several rights that are engaged. * Nigel: e.g. free expression versus right to property * David McAuley: In WS1 we agreed to punt on enforcement. * Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): @Niels -I am not sure what you mean by "representation on an act". But I agree that respecting Human Rights necessarily involves a balancing act. It may also be case-by-case. * Tatiana Tropina: I think what we are discussing now is actually the FoI issues - and good that we have transcripts. I also would like to offer - anyone - please - go to the concerns document, it still is in the drafting process (in its very inception) and do list your concerns . * Niels ten Oever 2: @Anne - Destruction of buildings is not by far the same as showing videos of destruction. On this topic, also see the Manilla Principles. * Farzaneh Badii: enforcement question. * Tatiana Tropina: Enforcement in this document is about external enforcement. Internal enforcement is a valid point for future discussion. * Paul McGrady: Problem of defining Respect and it being punted to WS2. did this get into constituencies etc. * Tatiana Tropina: It was more of a policy discussion and drawing border between Respect and Protection. * David McAuley: I recall the discussions around respect being about ICANN the organization rather than the commmunity. * Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): Is providing in the Registry Agreement that ICANN can direct the Registry to takedown any website that is clearly demonstrated or purposed toward Human Rights violations (e.g. sex trafficing of minors website) a matter of "external enforcment" or a matter of action taken to avoid contributing to Human Rights abuses? If ICANN supports policies that prevent law enforcement from getting to the perpetrators, then those policies would be contributing to Human Rights abuses. Or does ICANN say, "not my problem - out of scope". Good luck finding these people. We think it's fine if their location and contact information is completely private. * Kavouss Arasteh: meeting badly organized. * David McAuley: We never really delved into respect neiter did we go beyond ICANN the organization. * Greg Shatan: There was some discussion of Respect in WS1. * Niels Ten Oever: One more week to work on the document. (Several green Ticks and no comments).. Everyone is invited to contribute tot he document. 3. Discussion on: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI [1] * Niels Ten Oever: Paul Twomey is not on this call and will ask him and TT to work on this document over the coming week. I would also invite everyone to contribute to this if they have input. * Kavouss Arasteh: general disagreement with process and activities. NTO: explanation of process. * Ron da Silva: Board Concerns? These were well captured in the document. Unaware of any additional concerns vs those from WS1. * Jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): CHAT - apart from concerns that the HR commitment would go "too far", we should also be careful in not weakening the current level of commitment according especially to article IV of the AoI * Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC) CHAT: This was a concern I expressed earlier - being bound to Article 4 without a Framework of Interpretation. * jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): I would see that analysis (of the current level of commitment under current AoI and Bylaws) either as a staff supported endeavour or as a collective effort... not sure whether Lee could cope with it - I'm a bit reluctant to speak on his behalf :-S * Tijani Ben Jemaa: we have to go forward with our narrow mission of creating an FOI - we should not add to our scope. * Andrew Mack: here here Tijani. less is more -- it will be challenge enough as a limited mandate * David McAuley: Good reminder, thanks Tijani * Tatiana Tropina: We agreed during the WS1 that we can not say whether Art 4 of AoI creates the obligation because HR instruments are mostly for the states * Niels Ten Oever: good point TBJ. I will draft a frame of this document to get us started next week. * Kavouss Arasteh: Discussion of what is the FOI? * Niels Ten Oever: Annex 6 of the CCWG report describes this quite well and provides some examples. 4. Discussion on working tools of the Design Team (Wiki, mailinglist, Github, Google Docs, Etherpads, etc) * Niels Ten Oever: Problems with Googledocs - the only tools for collaborative working on text is Etherpad and Googledocs. Googledocs has more functionality so we will keep using it for now. If you have further comments on this please provide them on the list. * Tijani Ben Jemaa: Let us use what ICANN provides so everyone can contribute. The Wiki works well. * Niels Ten Oever: lets take this to the list. 5. AOB * Niels Ten Oever: adjourned.

3 2

Concerns and summary documents
by Niels ten Oever Aug. 23, 2016

Aug. 23, 2016

Dear all, Thanks you very much for the productive and constructive first call of the CCWG WS2 DT HR, as agreed, please find underneath two empty good docs for the agreed tasks: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI - lead by Paul Twomey and Tatian Tropina https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_… Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights duringWS1 - lead by Greg Shatan, Tatiana Tropina, David McAuley, Niels ten Oever https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… All the 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

5 6

draft agenda call August 23 1900 UTC
by Niels ten Oever Aug. 23, 2016

Aug. 23, 2016

Dear all, Please find underneath the proposed agenda for our call on August 23 at 19:00 UTC. 1. Administrivia 2. Discussion on: the Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 [0] 3. Discussion on: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI [1] 4. Discussion on working tools of the Design Team (Wiki, mailinglist, Github, Google Docs, Etherpads, etc) 5. AOB Volunteers from our group are still working on the documents, and I am sure they will appreciate your review and input in the form of suggested text and comments. Suggestions for agenda points are welcome of course. Looking forward to the call tomorrow. Best, Niels [0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNM… [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_… -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

1 0

Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #1 - 16 August
by MSSI Secretariat Aug. 16, 2016

Aug. 16, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #1 – 16 August 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/CwKsAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes & Action Items Action Item: 1. Start work by capturing risks and unintended consequences taking into account the work from WS1. - small group to be lead by Paul Twomey 2. Document the Human rights discussion, agreements and work from WS1 - Lead by Sonigitu, with Niels, Greg, David and Tatiana 3. Work using Google docs this week and will reconsider at next meeting Documents Presented · Presentation Meeting 0.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/61604363/Presentation%20Me…>

1 0

Agenda + Slides call August 16 - 1900 UTC
by Niels ten Oever Aug. 16, 2016

Aug. 16, 2016

Dear all, Please find attached the slides for the CCWG WS2 HR DT* call on the 16th of August at 1900 UTC as well as a proposed agenda underneath. 1. Administrivia 2. Opening Remarks 3. Scope and purpose as outlined by WS1 4. Proposed Time line 5. Questions to answer (in FoI) 6. Meetings 7. Workplan 8. AOB I greatly looking forward to the call, please let me know if you have any questions of suggestions either onlist or offlist. All the best, Niels * = Cross Community Working Groups on Enhacing ICANNs Accountability Workstream 2 Human Rights Design Team -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

4 4