Thanks, Niels. There is not much time to consider in detail a document mit huge implications for policy development for all groups in ICANN. I propose to give more time for reflexion and comment. For me, there is too much open texture about human rights commitments but much too strong and powerful procedural elements. It is important to fight for human rights but – as a organisation with a public interest – we should leave these discusssions about human rights commitments to many other fora in human rights and accept the consensus achieved there (with its many, many open questions, only to mention the reservations to human rights treaties). It may be unsatisfactory but it has worked quite well and respects also the jurisdictional questions. Best, Erich ao. Univ.-Prof. Mag. DDr. Erich Schweighofer Arbeitsgruppe Rechtsinformatik / Centre for Computers and Law Institut für Europarecht, Internationales Recht und Rechtsvergleichung / Department of European, International and Comparative Law Universität Wien / University of Vienna Schottenbastei 10-16/2/5, 1010 Wien, AT Tel. +43 1 4277 35305, Fax +43 1 4277 9353 Erich.Schweighofer@univie.ac.at http://rechtsinformatik.univie.ac.at IRIS2017 - 20 Jahre, 23.-25.02.2017, Salzburg https://www.univie.ac.at/RI/iris17 ENISA Annual Privacy Forum APF2017, 07.-08.06.2017, Wien http://privacyforum.eu/ Von: Aikman-Scalese, Anne<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. März 2017 09:18 An: 'Niels ten Oever'<mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net>; ws2-hr<mailto:ws2-hr@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [Ws2-hr] Copenhagen Drafting Team Consensus Wichtigkeit: Hoch Niels, I must take objection to your characterization of this document as a "consensus" document for the drafting team. As you know, I have continued to insist on two "Considerations" that are not addressed here: 1. The need to refer to a "balancing" of Human Rights considerations in ICANN's processes and protocols in relation to policy making. I do not know why several on the drafting team continued to resist this well-accepted concept in Human Rights law in Saturday evening's drafting team meeting. In connection with the presentations on Data Protection made by representatives from the Council of Europe, this was referred to as the Principle of Proportionality in Human Rights law. In this regard, further discussion with Alessandra Pierucci of the Council of Europe was quite helpful. For more information on this Principle of Proportionality in the context of ICANN and Rights Protection Mechanisms, please see this publication from an expert in Denmark: https://www.humanrights.dk/research/list-of-publications/human-rights-balanc... 2. The group has given no "Consideration" to date regarding what Ruggie calls the "grievance procedures" necessary to any Human Rights accountability effort. It is clear from the Core Value language that the Request for Reconsideration and Independent Review Process is intended to be available for claims that Board decisions violate Human Rights. The question is whether there is an earlier and less formal route for conflict resolution as contemplated by the Empowered Community structure. Thus, there is a need to at least note this issue in the "Considerations" for ICANN processes and protocols. I am not suggesting that our group address this issue, but we must note in "Considerations" that it needs to be addressed by later working groups. 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, March 13, 2017 1:20 PM To: ws2-hr Subject: [Ws2-hr] Copenhagen Drafting Team Consensus Dear all, The drafting team has been working hard during evening and early morning meetings and managed to come to a drafting team consensus of the considerations document, for your consideration. You can find the document attached and at the following link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rDYyuXacrSYDtlSK5JqNQe7XOX2LbM86AzfDay8z... If you have questions, comments or suggestions, feel please bring them up on the list or in our upcoming meeting. But also feel free to approach the members of the drafting team during ICANN58 Copenhagen for more background. 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. _______________________________________________ Ws2-hr mailing list Ws2-hr@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr

Thanks Anne. Thanks Niels. Niels, I hope that you will reconsider calling this document a "consensus" document until we have a chance to talk through it on our next couple of calls. Not everyone was able to make it to the face to face due to ICANN scheduling outside of the main meeting dates, thus pushing our work to the margins. To indicate that those of us who weren't able to be there consent to this document without the chance for meaningful review and discussion may be a smidge too far. :) All, I agree with Anne's intervention regarding the glaring absence in this document of the Principle of Proportionality. Let's please explore this in our next call. It appears to be vital. Kind regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 9:18 AM To: 'Niels ten Oever' <lists@nielstenoever.net>; ws2-hr <ws2-hr@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Copenhagen Drafting Team Consensus Importance: High Niels, I must take objection to your characterization of this document as a "consensus" document for the drafting team. As you know, I have continued to insist on two "Considerations" that are not addressed here: 1. The need to refer to a "balancing" of Human Rights considerations in ICANN's processes and protocols in relation to policy making. I do not know why several on the drafting team continued to resist this well-accepted concept in Human Rights law in Saturday evening's drafting team meeting. In connection with the presentations on Data Protection made by representatives from the Council of Europe, this was referred to as the Principle of Proportionality in Human Rights law. In this regard, further discussion with Alessandra Pierucci of the Council of Europe was quite helpful. For more information on this Principle of Proportionality in the context of ICANN and Rights Protection Mechanisms, please see this publication from an expert in Denmark: https://www.humanrights.dk/research/list-of-publications/human-rights-balanc... 2. The group has given no "Consideration" to date regarding what Ruggie calls the "grievance procedures" necessary to any Human Rights accountability effort. It is clear from the Core Value language that the Request for Reconsideration and Independent Review Process is intended to be available for claims that Board decisions violate Human Rights. The question is whether there is an earlier and less formal route for conflict resolution as contemplated by the Empowered Community structure. Thus, there is a need to at least note this issue in the "Considerations" for ICANN processes and protocols. I am not suggesting that our group address this issue, but we must note in "Considerations" that it needs to be addressed by later working groups. 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, March 13, 2017 1:20 PM To: ws2-hr Subject: [Ws2-hr] Copenhagen Drafting Team Consensus Dear all, The drafting team has been working hard during evening and early morning meetings and managed to come to a drafting team consensus of the considerations document, for your consideration. You can find the document attached and at the following link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rDYyuXacrSYDtlSK5JqNQe7XOX2LbM86AzfDay8z... If you have questions, comments or suggestions, feel please bring them up on the list or in our upcoming meeting. But also feel free to approach the members of the drafting team during ICANN58 Copenhagen for more background. 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 ________________________________ 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

Greg mentioned his link to the text on the intersection of Human Rights and Intellectual Property did not seem to work. So here is a better link from Amazon. All we need to do in this regard is add "with due regard to principles of proportionality" somewhere in our "Considerations" document. This is very simple and does not require a lot of additional deliberation by this group at this time. It just needs to be "flagged" for further policy-making activity. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1786433419/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?i... 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: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 1:18 AM To: 'Niels ten Oever'; ws2-hr Subject: RE: [Ws2-hr] Copenhagen Drafting Team Consensus Importance: High Niels, I must take objection to your characterization of this document as a "consensus" document for the drafting team. As you know, I have continued to insist on two "Considerations" that are not addressed here: 1. The need to refer to a "balancing" of Human Rights considerations in ICANN's processes and protocols in relation to policy making. I do not know why several on the drafting team continued to resist this well-accepted concept in Human Rights law in Saturday evening's drafting team meeting. In connection with the presentations on Data Protection made by representatives from the Council of Europe, this was referred to as the Principle of Proportionality in Human Rights law. In this regard, further discussion with Alessandra Pierucci of the Council of Europe was quite helpful. For more information on this Principle of Proportionality in the context of ICANN and Rights Protection Mechanisms, please see this publication from an expert in Denmark: https://www.humanrights.dk/research/list-of-publications/human-rights-balanc... 2. The group has given no "Consideration" to date regarding what Ruggie calls the "grievance procedures" necessary to any Human Rights accountability effort. It is clear from the Core Value language that the Request for Reconsideration and Independent Review Process is intended to be available for claims that Board decisions violate Human Rights. The question is whether there is an earlier and less formal route for conflict resolution as contemplated by the Empowered Community structure. Thus, there is a need to at least note this issue in the "Considerations" for ICANN processes and protocols. I am not suggesting that our group address this issue, but we must note in "Considerations" that it needs to be addressed by later working groups. 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, March 13, 2017 1:20 PM To: ws2-hr Subject: [Ws2-hr] Copenhagen Drafting Team Consensus Dear all, The drafting team has been working hard during evening and early morning meetings and managed to come to a drafting team consensus of the considerations document, for your consideration. You can find the document attached and at the following link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rDYyuXacrSYDtlSK5JqNQe7XOX2LbM86AzfDay8z... If you have questions, comments or suggestions, feel please bring them up on the list or in our upcoming meeting. But also feel free to approach the members of the drafting team during ICANN58 Copenhagen for more background. 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 ________________________________ 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.