Please see string below, which was apparently not copied to the list. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image004.png@01D21261.DF37A7E0] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 10:10 AM To: 'Kavouss Arasteh'; John Curran; Niels ten Oever; Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch; Thomas Rickert; Mathieu Weill; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva; Olga Cavalli; <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Subject: RE: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC Thanks Kavouss. Just a note that if we request GNSO Input in the early stages of a draft framework, this is not a request for a PDP. Again I also note that no contracted party can be bound by any FOI-HR that is not developed pursuant to Consensus Policy, which cannot be adopted without a PDP or Expedited PDP. You misunderstand me in that you think I am attempting to delay. All I am pointing out is that in order to be effective, one must anticipate (as required by Annex 6) the natural consequences of the existing processes and procedures within ICANN. To the degree that we appreciate these, the FOI-HR is bound to be more effective in the long run and sooner. (Notwithstanding my concern re content regulation and consumer protection and IP protection issues related to UDRP procedures.) Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image002.png@01D2125E.05F5DB30] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 2:10 PM To: John Curran; Aikman-Scalese, Anne; Niels ten Oever; Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch>; Thomas Rickert; Mathieu Weill; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva; Olga Cavalli; <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC Dear Anne Pls kindly read my comments. I think once we have developed draft Recommendations( s) either before approval by CCWG or after its approval before being considered approved by ICANN it may 7 would go through public comments . Consequently I do not support that this little group propose any PDP which may last up to 6 or even more than 6 years , like FOI of ccNSO which last 6 years . Before we discussing that issue in the agenda, the issue must be reported to tg The CCWG PLENARY FOR DUISCUSSION . I will certainly object at that stage that once again GNS dominate the entire community with its " so-called *PDP which cooked by GNSO Regards Kavouss 2016-09-17 22:46 GMT+02:00 John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org<mailto:jcurran@istaff.org>>: Anne - I believe that we should (at a minimum) seek to improve ICANN’s policy development and implementation activities with respect to potential HR issues by: 1) Clearly defining what HR Convention(s) that will be considered applicable to its activities, 2) Provide a straightforward method for any party to raise a concern during the policy development process or during any ICANN consultation (to cover operational matters) that the intended policy or process would pose a threat to one or more human rights contained within the agreed list of HR Conventions, and 3) that raising such Human Right concern would in turn require that the final policy or process outcome be amended to directly acknowledge the raised concern and either include appropriate changes or provide a clear explanation of why the concern is either not relevant or is deemed a reasonable balance in light of ICANN’s overall obligations. If we do that (and do it well) we will have created an FOI-HR framework that it is both useful and yet operating fully within ICANN’s existing mission and mandate. /John p.s. my views alone - apologies to the electrons who labored to carry these thoughts all over the planet. On Sep 13, 2016, at 7:08 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com>> wrote: Another practical consideration to review as FOI-HR is being developed: Would registries get extra points in the application process for making Human Rights Public Interest Commitments? Does an HR PIC complaint and ICANN’s subsequent determination of whether such HR PIC is being met by the registry put it in the content regulation business? I think Andrew pointed out on the call that it is a good idea to consider what we are trying to fix or promote. Does “respect” just mean “avoid adverse impact” or does it mean something more, e.g. “reward positive impact”. Shall we define the word “respect” in the FOI-HR? Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428<tel:520.629.4428> office 520.879.4725<tel:520.879.4725> fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ <image005.png> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 3:29 PM To: 'Kavouss Arasteh' Cc: ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC Dear Kavouss, I do not understand why you object to even discussing the issue of how FOI – HR relates to the Policy Development Process and GAC Policy Advice. If everyone is content to know that the FOI-HR will not apply to any Registry contract prior to development of Consensus Policy via a PDP or Expedited PDP, then that is quite alright with me. I am just pointing out that this is the path we are heading down. I think it would be smarter to engage stakeholders broadly and earlier – that is, in the form of GAC public policy advice and GNSO guidance (at the very least) in the drafting of the Framework itself. If we do so early on, then a “go-ahead” from the Chartering Organizations will be much easier to obtain later. As was pointed out by someone else on the call, we also need to make a recommendation – in the Framework – as to whether or not it may serve as a basis for a Request for Reconsideration or an IRP, which is certainly implied by the drafting in the new By-Laws. Again, I think it would be wiser to obtain GAC public policy advice and GNSO Guidance on this point now rather than later (when we think our work is done.) The following tasks are set out for our group: <image003.png> Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428<tel:520.629.4428> office 520.879.4725<tel:520.879.4725> fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ <image004.png> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 1:48 PM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Cc: Niels ten Oever; ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC Dear Anne What you are saying may be right but this is outside our terms of reference. We have to establish the draft Recommendation(s) on the FOI relating to Human Rights and submit that to CCWG .Once adopted by CCWG then it will be probably put into public comments After the Recommendation(s) are finalized it7 they will be submitted to ICANN and thus it is up to ICANN to deal with that. Should ICANN decides that parts of all of that should be subject to PDP,it is ICANN decision and policy. Consequently, we should not be involved in the necessity or otherwise of developing PDP or recommending the need or otherwise of PDP. Should there be any doubt on that the chair should raise this point at the next meeting of CCWG Plenary. In view of the above, I strongly disagree with the inclusion of the item in the agenda as an agreed item Regards Kavouss 2016-09-13 22:18 GMT+02:00 Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com>>: Having said that Human Rights FOI could be introduced in the Subsequent Procedures PDP currently underway but might happen faster via its own Expedited PDP. This is only important if you want to bind registries. Please note that ICANN applicable law in this regard does not automatically apply to registries. Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428<tel:520.629.4428> office 520.879.4725<tel:520.879.4725> fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> -----Original Message----- From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 1:08 PM To: 'Niels ten Oever'; ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC Dear all, I hope that everyone understands that no provision re Human Rights can be added to a Registry Contract unless developed via Consensus Policy. Consensus Policy is a strictly defined term. (These are the only provisions which may be added unilaterally by ICANN.) Further, the ONLY method of developing Consensus Policy is pursuant to either a full Policy Development Process or else an Expedited Policy Development Process. So if you think you can adopt a Ruggie principle of ICANN addressing Human Rights in all its business relationships, you must also apply the Ruggie 18 b principle and understand that NO REGISTRY IS BOUND BY ANYTHING OTHER THAN CONSENSUS POLICY (and applicable law of the jurisdiction where the Registry is based.) Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428<tel:520.629.4428> office 520.879.4725<tel:520.879.4725> fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> -----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 11:15 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC Dear all, Please find underneath the proposed agenda for the call for September 13 1900 UTC. Please let me know if you would like to add, amend or remove any agenda points. 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 2. Final Discussion on: Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 (attached and here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNMo... ) 3. General Discussion & Q&A on Ruggie Principles and Ruggie FIFA report (attached and here: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.p... https://www.hks.harvard.edu/content/download/79736/1789834/version /1/file/Ruggie_humanrightsFIFA_reportApril2016.pdf<https://www.hks.harvard.edu/content/download/79736/1789834/version/1/file/Ru...> ) 4. Discussion on: Analysis of Ruggie Principles for ICANN – Short presentation by Drafting Volunteershttps://docs.google.com/document/d/10XMIVosuEfgmXwr7SQjeNLKI8r_hdONrJNV2ih72... 5. AOB Looking forward to the call. Best, Niels -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org/> PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:Ws2-hr@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:Ws2-hr@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:Ws2-hr@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.