Meeting Notes

  Maryam Bakoshi:Dear all, welcome to the ICANN and HR call on Friday 29th May 2015

  Maryam Bakoshi:Rafik Dammak and Niels Ten Oever have joined the meeting

  Maryam Bakoshi:Welcome

  Monika Zalnieriute:I also right it here:)

  Monika Zalnieriute:haha, I read that I am shy here:)

  Monika Zalnieriute:ok, I wait for the call then!

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:Monika, can you pick up?

  Monika Zalnieriute:I still did not get a call

  rafik:who joined?

  Maryam Bakoshi: Pranesh Prakash

  Monika Zalnieriute:but I can hear You though,

  Maryam Bakoshi:Vipul Karbhanda

  Maryam Bakoshi:have both joined

  Monika Zalnieriute:mayeb someone know, what I should click to make my mic work?

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:Clicl on the mic Monika

  Alexandra:hi!

  Maryam Bakoshi:Alexandra please could you state your full name for record purposes. Thank you

  Alexandra:Maryam, it's Alexandra Kulikova

  Marilia Maciel:Please start the recording

  Monika Zalnieriute:yes, I can,

  Marilia Maciel:Please, can we let the ppl on the phone introduce themselves?

  Alexandra:i'm not sure I won't be able to speak though unfortunately(

  Marilia Maciel:Please, mute your mics

  rafik:niels shoulds disable the mic for his adobe connect :)

  Marianne F:Hi all , there is feedback so we are hearing Niels twice

  Marianne F:You're welcom Monika, apologies for the lengthy email nonetheless! :)

  Marilia Maciel:What is the deadline to comment?

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:Depends if we want to print it nicely

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:If we want it to be gone via editor, design and print, we will need to have it done by Monday

  rafik:@Niels it is a working document for CCWP to continue the discussion, expecting the CCWP to produce its first delvierable

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:Indeed, so we need to agree on a approval procedure (point 1.3 :) )

  rafik:I would see it as an "issue report" not necessarily needed an approval , it is more research work to give input

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:let's discuss this under the next point

  Pranesh Prakash:If we don't make a strong defence of HR, who will? :-) Having said that I don't think there's a need to establish a duty to protect on ICANN's part.

  Marianne F:OF course, they do have this responsibility just we need to proceed step by step. So if the point is made in a note then it is there on the record to be used and referred to later if need be (just reiterating verbal point in writing)

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:+1

  Pranesh Prakash:+1

  Maryam Bakoshi:Nigel Hickson has joined

  Marilia Maciel:Audio issues here. Will have to go out and enter again, sorry

  Marianne F:+1 from me for leaving it in as example; just to edit and tighten up for now and indicate there option of more detailed analysis later

  Pranesh Prakash:+1 to Marianne

  Monika Zalnieriute:Guys, I agree to have it as an example: would You like to have it a shorter part though for now?

  Monika Zalnieriute:in this particular report?

  Monika Zalnieriute:+ Lee; it might be too much stuff.

  Monika Zalnieriute:All at once.

  Marianne F:Hi, if the feeling is to keep it in then perhaps as a note? But Lee is pointing out the timing issue so I would defer to those who know ICANN better than I do

  Marianne F:Please mute mics when typing! :)

  Marianne F:If in doubt leave it out

  Alexandra:Agree that the UDRP part might draw attention from the substantial issues int he first partin the shape it is now

  Alexandra:I might have missed it - could smb please remind again how GAC is going to be engaged?

  Pranesh Prakash:Apologies. I have to leave now. But would just like to reiterate that we mustI (strategically) bear the burden of being the people who take positions on sensitive commercial issues. If we don't, no one else will. We can build bridges after we have some rough position.

  Marianne F:+1 from me Pranesh; point well taken, cheerio!

  rafik:@Alexandra we have some GAC members in the CCWP, it has its own working group and Lee is basically doing the liaison. maybe Lee can elaborate here

  Marilia Maciel:Maybe we could move to the session in BA?

  Monika Zalnieriute:So I would like to get the idea what do we do?: please type in here, so I could briefly have  an idea who is for LEAVING the UDRP and who is for TAKING OUT

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:The consensus seems to be that it could be mentioned as an  short example, but we leave ourt the longer expose.

  Alexandra:sorry

  Marilia Maciel:Yes, that is my feeling too

  Alexandra:I'll type

  rafik:@monika in few words more coming work for you :)

  Monika Zalnieriute:Ok, how long - and how detailed - simply a page or so or approx how long?

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:Shorter

  Marianne F:Mention it, keep it short as a concrete example vs. a full expose.

  Monika Zalnieriute:yes, yes, so simply a single refernece, You mean - thats it?

  Monika Zalnieriute:shorter than a page, You mean?

  Niels ten Oever - Article19:Yes

  Monika Zalnieriute:simply like an example mentione, in a sentence?:)

  Alexandra:guys, just a quick comment/observation: an elaborate description of  this one case study now will definitely attract criticism from Russian GAC representatives - as at the Signapore meeting they were very vocal on the Crimean domains issue from the HR perspective. It's a very debateable issue in terms of how exactly that relates to  the ICANN remit, but if the HRtalk starts with UDRP in detail I can expect the reaction :) what I mean is that there seems to be a strong link for them berween ICANN and that incidet in the HR context. I can expect there will be efforts to stick it in

  Marianne F:.. I see your point but won't there be this sort of push back anyway? If this example really could become a red herring (forgive the pun) then leave it out for now. We can always put it back in...

  Alexandra:yeah I guess you're right.. But it would be good to at least formulate some stance on the issue from the group? or have a longer least of potential case studies for future

  Alexandra:*list

  rafik:there will be pish back for many topics, that is why we have to work on consensus and "educate"

  Marilia Maciel:Yes, open to collaboration/endorsements

  rafik:we need to get CCWP to have ownership on itw own deliverable

  Marianne F:I agree; send the final version of the report to the CCWP for comments. People comment best when there is something concrete to comment on.

  rafik:the public session is not clashing with important sessions

  rafik:kathy is not coming to BA

  Marilia Maciel:I would go bit further and ask them for their aseesment

  Marilia Maciel:some sort of responsibility to speak

  Marilia Maciel:great

  Marilia Maciel:Perfect

  Alexandra:thanks Niels

  Marianne F:Thanks Niels, thanks all for a great meeting

  Marilia Maciel:Thanks all

  Marilia Maciel:Bye all!

  Alexandra:thanks everyone and bye!