Attendees: 

Members:  Mathieu Weill, Thomas Rickert, Leon Sanchez, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Alan Greenberg, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Fiona Asonga, Athina Fragkouli, Izumi Okutani, Jordan Carter, Eberhard Lisse, Roelof Meijer, Olga Cavalli, Alice Munyua, Suzanne Radell, Julia Wolman, James Bladel, Becky Burr, Steve DelBianco, Robin Gross, Bruce Tonkin, Sebastien Bachollet

Participants:  Thomas Schneider,Wolf Ludwig, Kavouss Arasteh, Arun Sukuman, Avri Doria, Chris Disspain, David McAuley, Finn Petersen, Guru Acharya, Keith Drazek, Malcolm Hutty, Seun Ojedeji, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy, Oanh Nguyen Thi, Maura Gambassi, Martin Boyle, Mark Carvell, Paul Rosenzweig, Phil Buckingham, Rudi Daniel, Matthew Shears, Lars Erik Forsberg, Olivier Muron,

Staff:  Theresa Swinehart, Samantha Eisner, Adam Peake, Alice Jansen, Grace Abuhamad, Josh Baulch, Marika Konings, Glen de Saint Gery, Jim Trengrove, Bart Boswinkel, Nathlie Peregrine

Apologies

**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**


Transcript

Transcript CCWG ACCT #3 19 Jan.doc

Transcript CCWG ACCT #3 19 Jan.pdf

Recording

The Adobe Connect recording is available here:  https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p47etd0bdh7/

The audio recording is available here:  https://icann.box.com/shared/static/8ipy8fvr24fi8g2m4bdkqvjnzgjgic7i.mp3

Notes & Action Items

Finalize rest of scope & definition document

4 purposes:
- Compliance (internal rules)
- Performance level
- Applicable legislation (external rules)
- Decisions benefit of public

Is the notion of democratic accountability sufficiently conveyed?
Consulting with all stakeholders is one of the ways to assess whether decisions are appropriately taken into account input. Purpose: hear all voices and find the right balance

What is the concept of the purpose? Define what accountability is first

Include human rights concern and ensure policies are procedures respect human rights.
Clarify limit of ICANN's role: not responsible for content: human rights don't apply in this context. This could be clarified in core values
Freedom of expression, privacy etc apply to ICANN - policies are affecting content.
Multistakeholder model is broken if can't accommodate protection of human rights.
Action item: consider inclusion of human rights
ICANN has a limited technical mandate but articles of incorporation state that it operates in framework of international law and convention.
Regulatory decisions do have implications that affect internation agreed laws and national regulations
Action item: Include language on ICANN should be accountable to applicable
regulations
Rights are protected through oportunity to stop ICANN from violating them
Purposes must fall within ICANN scope

Take this concerns into account appropriately whithout going too far
--> this is outside of mandate

Action item: Add an overall comment that purposes of ICANN's accountability are to be interpreters within its scope, mission and values - on item #3, legislation could be expanded to include consideration of human rights as bounded by ICANN's values. CoChairs to circulate a new version for consideration

 

Chat Transcript

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (1/19/2015 07:17) Rightholders should include free expression.  Right now the table only mentions the trademark side, but free speech is a right that is balanced against.

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (07:18) @Robin : happy to accomaodate. We would need a way to describe the relevant entities ?

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (07:19) why aren't registrant directly affected by individual decsions.?

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:20) that was delbianco's point. registrants are affected by contracts AND individual decisions

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (07:20) Robin, I agree, we need to define the term rights holder in its broader sense.  there is more that one right we need to be concerend about.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:20) Mathieu, perhaps include in the comment section that now mentions UDRP - add free expression

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:21) privacy is a right we should considering also.  And Due Process.

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (07:21) if we mean inellectual property owners only we should say so.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:21) It seems to me that registrants are affected by most of these policies.

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (07:22) intellectual prpperty owners only, we should say that and quit being quite so euphemistic about ti all.

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (07:22) @Robin : that would extend a lot what a "right HOLDER" is right ? No one holds free speech

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (07:23) Mathieu, everyon ehold the right of free speech &c.

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:23) not sure anyone is attempting euphemisms. When we talk about RPMs we're talking about IP as well. it's just been how it's been discussed. agree with Mathieu about "holder" most likely

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:23) Mathieu, I don't undertand what you mean by "no one holds free speech".  Weren't they just marching in France to protect free speech rights of people?

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (07:24) @Robin, there is no private right to free speech, so I would rather create a new type of stakeholder

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:25) we already have "internet users" which captures those with other potential rights, no?

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:25) Mathieu, this IS the problem to fix: ICANN feeling it has no obligation to protect free speech rights of people.  We spend a lot of time making sure ICANN polices protect IP rights, but free speech rights are the other side of that coin. 

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (07:25) as i say if we mean IP owners only under rights owners, we need to say that plainly.  whenever i head rights owners, i hear users who have rights that are affected, not just the holders of propery rights.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:26) If ICANN is going to engange in governance functions, it can't leave the obligations out to protect people's free speech rights.

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (07:27) @Robin: agree, am struggling to find right way to describe these entities, can you help ?

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:28) they are just people, not entities

  Eric Brunner-Williams: (07:29) re: the idn cc tld comment, rather than fragmenting or leaving implicit in the cctld mgr, add script users (who are not necessarily national, e.g., arabic

  Eric Brunner-Williams: (07:29) so script communities

  Eberhard Lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (07:29) as much as I voted against that IDN ccTLDs are ccTLDs in as far as ICANN and the ccNSO is concerned :-)-O

  Eric Brunner-Williams: (07:36) problem with the a/c audio stream

  David McAuley (GNSO): (07:36) noise overtaking speaker

  Grace Abuhamad: (07:36) We are working to resolve the issues

  Volker Greimann [Observer - GNSO]: (07:37) operator, can will mute the noise?

  Eric Brunner-Williams: (07:37) thanks!

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:41) Are these categorisations "overweight" for ICANN? ICANN is a technical community beast and doesn't need to connect with the full "multistakeholder" community unlike say the IGF

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:42) Ooof. that's a pretty limited boundary given the number of parties directdly impacted by what ICANN does

  Eberhard Lisse [.NA ccTLD Manager]: (07:43) I always thought ICANN was policy :-)-O

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:43) for the tech community in one sense tho..

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:44) I just tihnk an overambitious ambit of stakeholders leads you down the scope creep route?

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:44) I think we need to re-work the table because Internet users are affected by all these policies and decisions.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:45) Robin - yes, no doubt about that, and they are stakeholders. but I more meant the five cateogries in the NetMundial thing aren't necessarily the right ones for ICANN

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:46) @Jordan but ICANN has a limited scope that still impacts a wide variety of people. That's differne than ICANN taking on the broad spectrum of interests of each of these stakeholders. The whole conversaion has to take place inside the remit of ICANN

  Sivasubramanian M: (07:47) Stakeholders are more appropriately classfied into three Broad categories,  Civil Society / Business / Government and fit in the subgroups under the three broad categories

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:47) Yep - and all convos within it should be focused on the things it needs to do, right? I am not trying to diminish the importance of that wide range of stakeholders, just suggesting that a totally comprehensive scan isn't necessary for ICANN in the way it is for, say, the IGF

  Volker Greimann [Observer - GNSO]: (07:47) I was always under the impression that users and businesses not members of "their" respective organizations are nontheless represented by them by the merit of the charter of the orgs

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:48) @Jordan, you don't need the broad specdtrum of issues addressed by IGF but you need to undersdtand whatd parties are impactded by decisions that ARE inside the remit of ICANN

  Alfred E Newman: (07:48) Hi Suzanne RadellWhy dose NTIA continue to let CentralNic violate US Law?

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:48) Yes and that's what we are doing here.. right, @Jonathan? :-)

  Matthew Shears: (07:48) I don't think that the WSIS and NM defintions are hugely useful - particulalry if you look at the actual defintions of the WSIS model which is incredibly limiting and based on a  roles and responsibilties that date from 2003/2005

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:49) +1 Matthew.

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:49) @Jordan, yes. I guess I thought you were arguing to limit the stakeholders we consider.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:49) +1 @Matthew

  Alfred E Newman: (07:49) ICANN is only "Accountable" to #RySG

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (07:50) @Jonathan - no, just the broad categorisations that arise from general IG texts like NMI or Tunis.

  Jonathan Zuck: (07:50) agree wite hthat Jordan

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:51) Parties directly affecting ICANN includes NonCom nominees, but it should also include the members of Nominating Cmte (those who select the nominees).

  Alfred E Newman: (07:52) NTIA  exposes American consumers to Harm, by FAKE.ccTLDs run by CentralNic.

  Alfred E Newman: (07:52) When will NTIA & ICANN enforce RAA?

  Alfred E Newman: (07:55) ACCOUNTABILITY:  the quality or state of being accountable; especially :  an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one's actions <public officials lacking accountability>

  Alfred E Newman: (07:55) http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accountability

  Alfred E Newman: (07:56) ICANN Compliance -  100% Useless.

  Alfred E Newman: (07:57) Suzanne, why did the NTIA let Francis Gurry help CentralNic evade US Law?

  Alfred E Newman: (07:58) Suzanne, why since WIPO / Francis Gurry dumped CentralNic, do the NTIA & ICANN now let NAF help CentralNic undermine US Law?

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:59) The section about ICANN operating for benefits should include reference to respect for human rights

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:59) for the benefit of the public, that is

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (07:59) d

  Grace Abuhamad: (08:00) @Alfred, please keep your comments on topic. We are currently discussing the purpose of accountability as described in Mathieu's document on screen

  Alfred E Newman: (08:02) Suzanne ... Why is CentralNic allowed to violate US Law 15/1125 ?

  Grace Abuhamad: (08:02) @Alfred -- Please stay on topic

  Alfred E Newman: (08:02) As of July 1, 2014, CENTRALNIC appoint ... the National Arbitration Forum is the sole authorized provider for CDRP disputes.

  Grace Abuhamad: (08:03) @Alfred -- this is your 3rd warning

  Alfred E Newman: (08:03) NTIA & ICANN ... The Jurisdiction of ".COM" is USA.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:07) domain names are speech.  courts all over the world have ruled that for many years.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:07) so ICANN does deal with free speech concerns.  domain names are content.

  Izumi Okutani (ASO): (08:07) I agree wtih Tijani, stick to what is related to ICANN activities and services

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:08) so the content of TLD strings is related to human rights and perhaps how gTLD policies affect gTLD registrations as well?

  Fiona Asonga: (08:08) +1 Tijani

  Keith Drazek (Participant and ICG Liaison): (08:09) The discussion of ICANN's mission, scope, core values and limited technical remit should be a guiding factor in this discussion.

  Izumi Okutani (ASO): (08:09) indeed Keith

  Samantha Eisner: (08:09) Considerations of human rights as bounded by ICANN's mission and core values

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:10) +1 @Sam and Keith

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (ALAC-AP Region): (08:10) I think that language works...@Robyn? what do you think of this?

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (08:11) It would be "..., including onsiderations of human rights as bounded by ICANN's mission and core values

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (08:11) ?

  Steve DelBianco: (08:11) Within ICANN's limited mission of providing the integrity and availability of unique identifiers in the DNS, the purpose of accountability is ...

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (ALAC-AP Region): (08:11) OK...

  Bruce Tonkin 2: (08:11) Robin - wouldn't that be the role of the GNSO to create policies in the area of protecting freedom of speech in domai n names?

  Izumi Okutani (ASO): (08:12) I prefer to be more specific than saying human rights e.g., freedom of speech, privacy

  Bruce Tonkin 2: (08:12) Maybe there needs t be UDRP dispute mechansims to resolve issues in that area.

  Eric Brunner-Williams: (08:12) inclusion of scripts also, as a human right

  Matthew Shears: (08:16) ICANN policy development should, it could be argued, have in place mechanisms to ensure consistency with human rights instruments

  Malcolm Hutty: (08:16) +1 Izumi, let's focus on application of relevant rights, and only in ways relevant to ICANN's mission - and exclude rights violations mainly by excluding the opportunity for them, by preventing scope creep in ICANN's mission

  Bruce Tonkin 2: (08:16) Here is the text from the articles of incorporation:

  Bruce Tonkin 2: (08:16) The Corporation shall operate for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, carrying out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of international law and applicable international conventions and local law and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with these Articles and its Bylaws, through open and transparent processes that enable competition and open entry in Internet-related markets. To this effect, the Corporation shall cooperate as appropriate with relevant international organizations.

  Mark Carvell  GAC - UK Govt: (08:17) Maybe include respect for intertn

  Volker Greimann [Observer - GNSO]: (08:18) ICANN does not need to be in the business of upholding human rights or privacy law, but it should also bear these in mind when formulating policy.

  Sivasubramanian M: (08:18) @ Wolfgang :  That is better achieved by expanding the definition of the "Internet User" as a stakeholder group,  not only as Domain Registrants, but also as Static / Dynamic IP addresss allottee, whose interests in terms of Privacy / Freedom of Expression etc are not violated by ICANN / IANA policy

  Mark Carvell  GAC - UK Govt: (08:18) continue: include respect for provisions of international conventions including rights in c)?

  Volker Greimann [Observer - GNSO]: (08:18) i.e. not force contracted parties to break either

  Tijani BEN JEMAA (ALAC): (08:25) + 1 @ Steve

  Izumi Okutani (ASO): (08:25) I agree with Malcom and Steve

  Marika Konings: (08:25) Note that in relation to a GNSO policy development process, the requestor for an Issue Report is requested to provide information on the economic impact or effect on competition, consumer trust, privacy and other rights in relation to the issue identified. Furthermore, the Final Report is expected to include a statement on the WG discussion concerning impact of the proposed recommendations, which could consider areas such as economic, competition, operations, privacy and other rights, scalability and feasibility.

  Jonathan Zuck: (08:27) Thanks Marika!

  Eric Brunner-Williams: (08:27) Thanks also Marika!!

  Jonathan Zuck: (08:30) And yet that IS the true boundary of IP protection

  Steve DelBianco: (08:31) @Jonathan Zuck:   ICANN's activities in IP rights are really about delivering integrity of domain registrations.  ie. the domain name does not misrepresent or mislead users

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (08:34) The other part of ICANN having a role in the content business is becasue the courts are brinigng it to ICANN.  It may not have wanted a role in Humar Rights and content, but it is  part of the role it has.  And it needs to be accountable to those huna rights.

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (08:34) to those applicable human rights.

  Bruce Tonkin 2: (08:34) THomas is right in that domian names thesmselves contain content.   Where I think we need to limit our role - those is just to the content in the domain name, not the content identified by the name - either via web pages or emails.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:35) Surely ICANN should only take an interest in the content of strings in the root

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:35) not of domain names per se

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:35) I think I will become green.

  Bruce Tonkin 2: (08:35) Well Jordan the whole UDRP process relates to the content in the second level of gTLD names.

  Becky Burr: (08:36) Bruce Tonkin points out that that language is already in ICANN's bylaws

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:36) True. Not for ccTLDs tho.

  Roelof Meijer (ccNSO): (08:36) @Jordan: not sure if that will help your argument..

  Jonathan Zuck: (08:36) and Marika points out the language is already in issue report and WG language

  Avri Doria (participant & atrt laison): (08:36) if courts and other government entitities are imposing the concerns on ICANN, then they should take an interst in them.  in fact must take an interest to some extent..

  Bruce Tonkin 2: (08:36) Yes Jordan - policy control for ccTLDs at the second level is delegated to the ccTLD manager.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:37) "Delegated" - hmm.

  Roelof Meijer (ccNSO): (08:38) "..is the ccTLD Manager's perogative.."?

  Becky Burr: (08:38) inasmuch as most ccTLDs pre-date ICANN, "reserved" its perhaps a better description

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLDs): (08:38) yeah, I think we mean the same thing. As long as there is no suggestion that ICANN might try and control these ;)

  Eric Brunner-Williams: (08:40) operator, for the benefit of those using a/c remotely, when you cut off the audio, please say so rather than just cutting the mic

  • No labels