Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all, I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it. Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached: 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions. All the best, Niels -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments: “To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”. Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com -----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Dear all, I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it. Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached: 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions. All the best, Niels -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org> PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 ________________________________ 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.
Hi Anne, Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text? Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss? Thanks, Niels On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
Hi Niels, The drafting team (presently as I understand it as being Tatiana, Greg, Matthew, Anne, and myself) are and have been working on text but we all have fairly heavy schedules this past week (as I know most in subgroup do as well). We are hoping to have agreed text to send by 16:00 UTC today, perhaps sooner. Best wishes, David David McAuley Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager Verisign Inc. 703-948-4154 -----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 9:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com>; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Hi Anne, Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text? Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss? Thanks, Niels On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
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.
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
Dear All, As I emphasized at the last meeting, we need to agree or otherwise on any draft .If we do not agree will retain the orignal text, We can not waste any more time. It is clear the 4 people (mostly from one single ICANN constituency persistantly oppose to any change to the initial draft in spite of clear comments received from three Governments during Public Comments) do not want any further référence to Ruggie Principle than those contained in the initial draft which is strange. In IOT one or two public comments( from private sector) encouraged the chair of IOT and one more member of the group to oblige the group to agree with those comments with some minor changes but here is the reverse. We are discussing this issue for three meeting AND ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Regards Kavouss . On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:15 PM, McAuley, David via Ws2-hr <ws2-hr@icann.org
wrote:
Hi Niels,
The drafting team (presently as I understand it as being Tatiana, Greg, Matthew, Anne, and myself) are and have been working on text but we all have fairly heavy schedules this past week (as I know most in subgroup do as well).
We are hoping to have agreed text to send by 16:00 UTC today, perhaps sooner.
Best wishes, David
David McAuley Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager Verisign Inc. 703-948-4154
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 9:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com>; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Hi Anne,
Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text?
Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss?
Thanks,
Niels
On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
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.
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 ______________________________ _________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
With apologies, I must miss today's meeting as I will be in the midst of a college tour with my son at my alma mater. The drafting team has not completed its work; I'm not as optimistic as David that we will do so in the next few hours. I agree that if we cannot come to consensus on a change, the current version stands. However, if we are going to "count noses," I see 3 public comments urging a change to our consensus, all from the same advisory committees. On the other hand, I believe I see support for the consensus from members of at least 3 different stakeholder groups (not "mostly from one ICANN constituency"). While we should always fully consider and take into account public comments, that does not mean that changes need to or should be made based on that process. The burden of persuasion is on the comments and those supporting them. I for one am unpersuaded. I believe the logic and balance of our current consensus still stands. Finally, I believe that comparisons of particular decisions in different working groups, subgroups, implementation teams, etc., are of limited utility. The dynamics of such efforts are far too fact-specific and issue-specific to be useful. Greg On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:40 AM Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All, As I emphasized at the last meeting, we need to agree or otherwise on any draft .If we do not agree will retain the orignal text, We can not waste any more time. It is clear the 4 people (mostly from one single ICANN constituency persistantly oppose to any change to the initial draft in spite of clear comments received from three Governments during Public Comments) do not want any further référence to Ruggie Principle than those contained in the initial draft which is strange. In IOT one or two public comments( from private sector) encouraged the chair of IOT and one more member of the group to oblige the group to agree with those comments with some minor changes but here is the reverse. We are discussing this issue for three meeting AND ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Regards Kavouss .
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:15 PM, McAuley, David via Ws2-hr < ws2-hr@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Niels,
The drafting team (presently as I understand it as being Tatiana, Greg, Matthew, Anne, and myself) are and have been working on text but we all have fairly heavy schedules this past week (as I know most in subgroup do as well).
We are hoping to have agreed text to send by 16:00 UTC today, perhaps sooner.
Best wishes, David
David McAuley Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager Verisign Inc. 703-948-4154
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 9:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com>; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Hi Anne,
Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text?
Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss?
Thanks,
Niels
On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
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.
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
_______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
Please note that the drafting team has now come together and it looks like we will have a revised text for the call today. On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:44 AM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
With apologies, I must miss today's meeting as I will be in the midst of a college tour with my son at my alma mater.
The drafting team has not completed its work; I'm not as optimistic as David that we will do so in the next few hours.
I agree that if we cannot come to consensus on a change, the current version stands. However, if we are going to "count noses," I see 3 public comments urging a change to our consensus, all from the same advisory committees. On the other hand, I believe I see support for the consensus from members of at least 3 different stakeholder groups (not "mostly from one ICANN constituency").
While we should always fully consider and take into account public comments, that does not mean that changes need to or should be made based on that process. The burden of persuasion is on the comments and those supporting them. I for one am unpersuaded. I believe the logic and balance of our current consensus still stands.
Finally, I believe that comparisons of particular decisions in different working groups, subgroups, implementation teams, etc., are of limited utility. The dynamics of such efforts are far too fact-specific and issue-specific to be useful.
Greg
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:40 AM Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All, As I emphasized at the last meeting, we need to agree or otherwise on any draft .If we do not agree will retain the orignal text, We can not waste any more time. It is clear the 4 people (mostly from one single ICANN constituency persistantly oppose to any change to the initial draft in spite of clear comments received from three Governments during Public Comments) do not want any further référence to Ruggie Principle than those contained in the initial draft which is strange. In IOT one or two public comments( from private sector) encouraged the chair of IOT and one more member of the group to oblige the group to agree with those comments with some minor changes but here is the reverse. We are discussing this issue for three meeting AND ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Regards Kavouss .
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:15 PM, McAuley, David via Ws2-hr < ws2-hr@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Niels,
The drafting team (presently as I understand it as being Tatiana, Greg, Matthew, Anne, and myself) are and have been working on text but we all have fairly heavy schedules this past week (as I know most in subgroup do as well).
We are hoping to have agreed text to send by 16:00 UTC today, perhaps sooner.
Best wishes, David
David McAuley Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager Verisign Inc. 703-948-4154
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 9:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com>; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Hi Anne,
Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text?
Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss?
Thanks,
Niels
On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
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.
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
_______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
Greg I do not agree with your logic If there is agreement on any text between you 4 it must be agreed by the 3 , in your statement GAC, If not then initial text with partial compromise and three public comments should be forwarded to CCWG for action I will not bow down to any pressure Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 15 Aug 2017, at 16:56, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Please note that the drafting team has now come together and it looks like we will have a revised text for the call today.
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:44 AM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote: With apologies, I must miss today's meeting as I will be in the midst of a college tour with my son at my alma mater.
The drafting team has not completed its work; I'm not as optimistic as David that we will do so in the next few hours.
I agree that if we cannot come to consensus on a change, the current version stands. However, if we are going to "count noses," I see 3 public comments urging a change to our consensus, all from the same advisory committees. On the other hand, I believe I see support for the consensus from members of at least 3 different stakeholder groups (not "mostly from one ICANN constituency").
While we should always fully consider and take into account public comments, that does not mean that changes need to or should be made based on that process. The burden of persuasion is on the comments and those supporting them. I for one am unpersuaded. I believe the logic and balance of our current consensus still stands.
Finally, I believe that comparisons of particular decisions in different working groups, subgroups, implementation teams, etc., are of limited utility. The dynamics of such efforts are far too fact-specific and issue-specific to be useful.
Greg
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:40 AM Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote: Dear All, As I emphasized at the last meeting, we need to agree or otherwise on any draft .If we do not agree will retain the orignal text, We can not waste any more time. It is clear the 4 people (mostly from one single ICANN constituency persistantly oppose to any change to the initial draft in spite of clear comments received from three Governments during Public Comments) do not want any further référence to Ruggie Principle than those contained in the initial draft which is strange. In IOT one or two public comments( from private sector) encouraged the chair of IOT and one more member of the group to oblige the group to agree with those comments with some minor changes but here is the reverse. We are discussing this issue for three meeting AND ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Regards Kavouss .
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:15 PM, McAuley, David via Ws2-hr <ws2-hr@icann.org> wrote: Hi Niels,
The drafting team (presently as I understand it as being Tatiana, Greg, Matthew, Anne, and myself) are and have been working on text but we all have fairly heavy schedules this past week (as I know most in subgroup do as well).
We are hoping to have agreed text to send by 16:00 UTC today, perhaps sooner.
Best wishes, David
David McAuley Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager Verisign Inc. 703-948-4154
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 9:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com>; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Hi Anne,
Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text?
Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss?
Thanks,
Niels
On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
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.
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
_______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
Hi Niels. The proposed text is pasted below in blue. "3.1 When examining its internal operations, ICANN the organization could, if it so chooses, consider using a mechanism to assess its impact on Human Rights. Whether and, if so, what mechanism to choose is solely up to ICANN the organization to decide. No such assessment should directly or indirectly impact gTLD policy formation or execution without being fully consistent with existing processes and protocols. The results of the organization's analysis should be reflected in its annual reporting" The old text (and redlined text per your suggestion at the last meeting is attached.) It appears the primary changes from the old language to the new proposed language from the drafting team are: 1. Add “if it so chooses” 2. No specific reference to any specific assessment tool – either HRIA or UNGP 3. Specific reference to any impact on gTLD policy formation to be consistent with existing ICANN processes and protocols Hope this helps. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com -----Original Message----- From: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 6:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Hi Anne, Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text? Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss? Thanks, Niels On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to
volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is
determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment
from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy,
ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with
the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
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
-----Original Message-----
From: 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, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM
To: ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org>
Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss
with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team.
Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am
sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to
statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and
suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org> <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
-- 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.
Thanks for this information, Anne. I don't see any effort in addressing the three Government inputs. In our case they meant wide interministerial exchanges and consultations. Really sad to see such little accommodation to the input from three engaged Governments in the multistakeholder effort. Seems it will be difficult to explain internally how not even a mention to the universally accepted standard is included as a potential guideline for ICANN Org... regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com> Datum: 15. August 2017 um 20:09:55 MESZ An: 'Niels ten Oever' <lists@nielstenoever.net>, ws2-hr@icann.org <ws2-hr@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Hi Niels. The proposed text is pasted below in blue. "3.1 When examining its internal operations, ICANN the organization could, if it so chooses, consider using a mechanism to assess its impact on Human Rights. Whether and, if so, what mechanism to choose is solely up to ICANN the organization to decide. No such assessment should directly or indirectly impact gTLD policy formation or execution without being fully consistent with existing processes and protocols. The results of the organization's analysis should be reflected in its annual reporting" The old text (and redlined text per your suggestion at the last meeting is attached.) It appears the primary changes from the old language to the new proposed language from the drafting team are: 1. Add “if it so chooses” 2. No specific reference to any specific assessment tool – either HRIA or UNGP 3. Specific reference to any impact on gTLD policy formation to be consistent with existing ICANN processes and protocols Hope this helps. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com -----Original Message----- From: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 6:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Hi Anne, Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text? Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss? Thanks, Niels On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to
volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is
determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment
from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy,
ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with
the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
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
-----Original Message-----
From: 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, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM
To: ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org>
Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss
with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team.
Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am
sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to
statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and
suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org> <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
-- 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.
I support the proposed text. Couple of points: 1) The UNGP is a framework (not a mechanism) the scope of which goes far beyond what is in the bylaws, as was mentioned previously in this list and as has been discussed at considerable length; 2) the text rules out nothing - it merely says that ICANN the org will decide which tool to use (if ICANN the org were to decide to use the UNGP framework it would make that decision, not this WG); 3) no particular mechanism or tool is prescribed, nor should it be - that is a position the WG has been pretty clear on from the start of these discussions when trying to delineate between interpretation and implementation; 4) the suggestion of remedy or remediation has not been discussed nor, as far as I am aware, has it been called out in the public consultation submissions, and were it even agreed (and I do not support its inclusion) it is far beyond the remit of this group to make such a determination. Matthew On 15/08/2017 19:22, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Thanks for this information, Anne. I don't see any effort in addressing the three Government inputs. In our case they meant wide interministerial exchanges and consultations. Really sad to see such little accommodation to the input from three engaged Governments in the multistakeholder effort. Seems it will be difficult to explain internally how not even a mention to the universally accepted standard is included as a potential guideline for ICANN Org... regards Jorge
________________________________
Von: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com> Datum: 15. August 2017 um 20:09:55 MESZ An: 'Niels ten Oever' <lists@nielstenoever.net>, ws2-hr@icann.org <ws2-hr@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Hi Niels. The proposed text is pasted below in blue.
"3.1 When examining its internal operations, ICANN the organization could, if it so chooses, consider using a mechanism to assess its impact on Human Rights. Whether and, if so, what mechanism to choose is solely up to ICANN the organization to decide. No such assessment should directly or indirectly impact gTLD policy formation or execution without being fully consistent with existing processes and protocols. The results of the organization's analysis should be reflected in its annual reporting"
The old text (and redlined text per your suggestion at the last meeting is attached.)
It appears the primary changes from the old language to the new proposed language from the drafting team are:
1. Add “if it so chooses”
2. No specific reference to any specific assessment tool – either HRIA or UNGP
3. Specific reference to any impact on gTLD policy formation to be consistent with existing ICANN processes and protocols
Hope this helps.
Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 6:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Hi Anne,
Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text?
Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss?
Thanks,
Niels
On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment from the governments: “To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy, ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with the existing processes and protocols”. Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 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 -----Original Message----- From: 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, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM To: ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Dear all, I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team. Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am sure they are working hard on it. Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached: 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to statement to CCWG 4. AOB As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and suggestions. All the best, Niels -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org> <http://www.article19.org> PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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.
--
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 https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
--- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
-- Matthew Shears matthew@intpolicy.com +447712472987 Skype:mshears
Unfortunately, I cannot make the call, but I support the text as drafted by David, Greg, and Tatiana. ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> __________ On Aug 15, 2017, at 2:09 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com>> wrote: Hi Niels. The proposed text is pasted below in blue. "3.1 When examining its internal operations, ICANN the organization could, if it so chooses, consider using a mechanism to assess its impact on Human Rights. Whether and, if so, what mechanism to choose is solely up to ICANN the organization to decide. No such assessment should directly or indirectly impact gTLD policy formation or execution without being fully consistent with existing processes and protocols. The results of the organization's analysis should be reflected in its annual reporting" The old text (and redlined text per your suggestion at the last meeting is attached.) It appears the primary changes from the old language to the new proposed language from the drafting team are: 1. Add “if it so chooses” 2. No specific reference to any specific assessment tool – either HRIA or UNGP 3. Specific reference to any impact on gTLD policy formation to be consistent with existing ICANN processes and protocols Hope this helps. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 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: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 6:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Hi Anne, Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text? Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss? Thanks, Niels On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to
volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is
determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment
from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy,
ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with
the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
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] On
Behalf Of Niels ten Oever
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM
To: ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org>
Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss
with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team.
Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am
sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to
statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and
suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org> <http://www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org>>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
-- 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. <Redline HR from 8 Aug 2017 Call.png> _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:Ws2-hr@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
I also support the new text as drafted. Thanks. rd On Aug 15, 2017 2:41 PM, "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org> wrote:
Unfortunately, I cannot make the call, but I support the text as drafted by David, Greg, and Tatiana.
------------------------------ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 <(202)%20608-6097> heritage.org
__________
On Aug 15, 2017, at 2:09 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com> wrote:
Hi Niels. The proposed text is pasted below in blue.
"3.1 When examining its internal operations, ICANN the organization could, if it so chooses, consider using a mechanism to assess its impact on Human Rights. Whether and, if so, what mechanism to choose is solely up to ICANN the organization to decide. No such assessment should directly or indirectly impact gTLD policy formation or execution without being fully consistent with existing processes and protocols. The results of the organization's analysis should be reflected in its annual reporting"
The old text (and redlined text per your suggestion at the last meeting is attached.)
It appears the primary changes from the old language to the new proposed language from the drafting team are:
1. Add “if it so chooses”
2. No specific reference to any specific assessment tool – either HRIA or UNGP
3. Specific reference to any impact on gTLD policy formation to be consistent with existing ICANN processes and protocols
Hope this helps.
Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 <(520)%20629-4428> office
520.879.4725 <(520)%20879-4725> fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message----- From: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net <lists@nielstenoever.net>] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 6:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Hi Anne,
Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text?
Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss?
Thanks,
Niels
On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to
volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is
determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment
from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy,
ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with
the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 <(520)%20629-4428> office
520.879.4725 <(520)%20879-4725> fax
AAikman@lrrc.com
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org <ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org>] On
Behalf Of Niels ten Oever
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM
To: ws2-hr@icann.org
Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss
with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team.
Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am
sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to
statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and
suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
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. <Redline HR from 8 Aug 2017 Call.png> _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
_______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
Dear all, Unfortunately I have just been called into a meeting for all the lawyers in my office. I know that Greg is also unable to attend this call. One point I would like to make is that members of the drafting team are not all from the same constituency as Kavouss has suggested. Greg and I may be from IPC, but David is from the registries and Tatiana is not from either one of these. She may be ALAC – I am not certain. Matthew Shears was involved and he is also from the non-commercial side of things. Sorry but I will have to enter back into the conversation after listening to the transcript from this meeting. IF my all lawyers meeting ends sooner, I will come back in during the call. Thanks to everyone for their active participation. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image003.png@01D315BD.BF34D7F0] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: Schaefer, Brett [mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 11:41 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Cc: Niels ten Oever; ws2-hr@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Unfortunately, I cannot make the call, but I support the text as drafted by David, Greg, and Tatiana. ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> __________ On Aug 15, 2017, at 2:09 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com>> wrote: Hi Niels. The proposed text is pasted below in blue. "3.1 When examining its internal operations, ICANN the organization could, if it so chooses, consider using a mechanism to assess its impact on Human Rights. Whether and, if so, what mechanism to choose is solely up to ICANN the organization to decide. No such assessment should directly or indirectly impact gTLD policy formation or execution without being fully consistent with existing processes and protocols. The results of the organization's analysis should be reflected in its annual reporting" The old text (and redlined text per your suggestion at the last meeting is attached.) It appears the primary changes from the old language to the new proposed language from the drafting team are: 1. Add “if it so chooses” 2. No specific reference to any specific assessment tool – either HRIA or UNGP 3. Specific reference to any impact on gTLD policy formation to be consistent with existing ICANN processes and protocols Hope this helps. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 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: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 6:12 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC Hi Anne, Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text? Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and redline version so we have very clear what do discuss? Thanks, Niels On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
Thanks Niels. Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to
volunteer. I propose adding the following language to whatever is
determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment
from the governments:
“To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy,
ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with
the existing processes and protocols”.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
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] On
Behalf Of Niels ten Oever
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM
To: ws2-hr@icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org>
Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
Dear all,
I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss
with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team.
Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am
sure they are working hard on it.
Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to
statement to CCWG 4. AOB
As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and
suggestions.
All the best,
Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org> <http://www.article19.org>
PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
-- 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. <Redline HR from 8 Aug 2017 Call.png> _______________________________________________ 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.
participants (10)
-
Aikman-Scalese, Anne -
Arasteh -
Greg Shatan -
Jorge.Cancio＠bakom.admin.ch -
Kavouss Arasteh
-
Matthew Shears -
McAuley, David -
Niels ten Oever -
Rudolph Daniel -
Schaefer, Brett