Sub-group Members:   Alan Greenberg, Asha Hemrajani, Avri Doria, Becky Burr, Carlos Raul Gutiérrez, David McAuley, Erika Mann, Gary Hunt, Gonzalo Navarro, Greg Shatan, James Gannon, Jorge Cancio, Kavouss Arasteh, Robin Gross, Steve DelBianco   (15)

Legal Counsel:  Holly Gregory

Staff:  Alain Durand, Alice Jansen, Bernie Turcotte, Berry Cobb, Brenda Brewer


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




These high-level notes are designed to help you navigate through content of the call and do not substitute in any way the transcript.


para 187 vs contract enforcement is a misunderstanding which can be corrected.

Propose a clarification that any voluntary commitments (contracts) and consensus policies can be enforced.

Need to better understand ALAC comment on this.

AG- discussions about PICs and with NCSG that the TLD and domain names themselves are content and cannot be controlled and this could be interpreted by some as restricting ICANN from limiting things like confusingly similar.

BBurr - a clear reference that consensus policies are within the ICANN mission would fix this concern?

AG - ideally yes but pratice no

DM - issues is more about domain names vs TLDs.

BB - need to clearly describe what is consensus policies. 187 had a lot of support when drafted.Removing it could cause major issues. Would be good to have volounteers to work on language.

DM - Would be good to group issues. 187 may  relate to Stress test 29 and 30.

KA - does not support 187 language is not clear

BB - This text has been present for a very long time.

AshaH - what is absolute prohibition.

BB - ICANN has enumerated powers, if not listed it is not in ICANN powers..Intends to say ICANN must act within its mission.

GS - There are some issues with the language - Bylaws drafting is an issue how we get from this to bylaws language - may be more useful to look at this more as properly defining the concepts (BB agrees).. In this language AS REASONABLY APPROPRIATE - unclear on relationship between mssion and bylawws - gives broad rights. Second sentence - regulation not defined. usually a unilateral act over what is covered - inherent flaw is that ICANN cannot regulate anything. Do regulation and enforcement overlapp etc. Willing to volunteer to improve this as per consensus.

Avri Doria: we recommend:  “ICANN shall not engage in or use its powers to regulate services that use the Internet's unique identifiers, or the content that they carry or provide."

Kavouss Arasteh: icann shall act in accordance with its mission and shall not be engaged in or attempt to regulate the services that use the Internet ;s unique identifier ,or the content that they carry or provide

BB - need language to instruct lawyers drafting.

KA - does not support HAVE NO POWER. needs to be simpler.jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): Please add for the record in the Notes of the meeting: I have an issue of process. According to the Roadmap distributed by the Co-Chairs up to Dublin we should identify areas of consensus, areas of refinemente, areas of divergence and potential options. We should do this in writing.

jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): Otherwise, as has happened before, the decisions taken by this WP are not traceable for people not able to participate.

AD - re NCSG proposal - If we are considering changing it we should consider all proposals.

BB - summary - The approach of enumerated powers has no oppostion. There is concern with the language itself regarding complexity and possibly of implementation. There are several suggeestions for modifications. There are concerns that the language could be interpreted as limiting ICANNs ability to enforce consensus policy and freeely entered into agreements.

GS - agree with summary. also issues around definin=g content and what ICANN does with respect to content currently. Willing to volounteer.

BB - GS, KA and DM to work on reviewing vs comments.

BB - move on to not having imported the entire affirmation of comm. text into this.. Need a decision to take the text out of here and put in the Review section - which seemed to be the best way to do this - there were several comments regarding this. Need to review the purpose this language serves and how to handle it. 

SDB - your description is accurate - have separated out AOC reviews into commitments and Bylaws.

BB - will produce document on this point for the group to consider.

AG - ALAC commented on removal of consumer trust.

KA - 1 deterministic language is not acceptable - 2 private sector issue - there are 4 categores of the community Private sectror, Civil society, Tech. comm- academia and govts.

BB - noted

BB - consumer trust issue was in there and will be included in the write up.

GS - Missing a sense of concordance bet AOC and our text. Need to understand where each aspect of the AOC has ended up in our propoal. Need to demanstrate clearly what has happened with the oriianl AOC.

BB - concordance would be useful.

AG - re Private sector defn - this list was created becasue there are many defns of private sector being used..

BB - correct. We continue to have objections froms some govts about this language. Also strong objections from commentors who took excxeption about how we addressed govt concern re how to address how GAC advice was inconsistent  with Bylaws.  (mutually acceptabe solution text). Propose to write this up as a whole that would clarify that at no time can ICANN act in a manner that is against the Bylaws. Volounteers?

Alan Greenberg: When re-writing, please factor in ALAC and other comments related to "civil society" and users.

AG - Like private sector civil society has many definitions.. There is enough confusion that it requires clarification.

BB - solution to this would be to add end-suers

jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: Dear Becky and Staff: please include the following suggestion in the Notes: jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: We support a wording in Commitment number 5 that recognizes in that Commitment that Governments participate in the bottom-up public policy process and provide their advice to ICANN Board

BB - last issue for today - Global public interest issue. Heard a lot about this in LA face to face that the ICANN Board is required to act in the global public interest. Need to recognize that this is defined by the bottom up multistakeholder model.. Have been clear as to how to define the globabl public interest.

GS - many efforts ongoing to define this in the context of ICANN. Sceptical about the exercise as this will always be subject to interpretation. At best this will be difficult.

BB - very encouraging.

AG - there is no defn. public interest in the Bylaws. Suggest we do not define but give examples.

BB - we do not have a defintion but in the core values we say that the bottom up Ms process is used to acertain the global public interest aaand have remove3d the other referrences to global public interest. Uncertain how we could define the global public interest - would the current approach be satisfactory

AG - what we have is troublesome because the MS bottom up process to determine what is global pulic interest.

BB - no the polcies developed by the bottom up MS process as the articulation of the public interest in the particular case.

AG - as clrified this causes him to fully reject..

BB - providing the Board with a global public interest Trump Card would not be acceptable to many.given it may go against polcies developped by the MS bottom up process.

AG - Board could not change the policy but could refuse to implement it because of global public interest.

KA - Remove bottom up references in all text - any effort to constrain the GAC in any way.. cannot subornitae any category of  stakeholder in any other

GS - public interest includes the interest of the public and private sectors.. If we want to avoid giving the Board the trump card - then do not give it the last word on deciding what is public issue.

KA - Why in 5 we do not mention Govt. 

BB - Private sector leadership has been in the ICANN Bylaws since very early days. But the wording was the subject of consensus but several govts have pushed back on. We need to have this discussion based on the comments

jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: Dear Becky: this organisation has evolved since its inception. At least the Government role should be included under Commitment number 5, as I suggested before

Kavouss Arasteh: That was written many years ago and by one single government wthat wanted to be the sole stewwardship of the whole process but we are changing that process

BB - public interest issue - 

RG - Use the ICANN Bottom up process to determine public interest.

BB - re public interest 

AG - bottom up process is fine but you need a level bottom up process - those with commercial interest can participate more.

GS - We are all trying to accomplish the same thing,. By defining it we may be tying the Board hands. We should not limit the list - but for those things tahat are identified we should not go against them.

 JC - he bottom-up process is our way to ascertain the public interest within ICANN, but the right mix and the right balance is key, including the fair consideration of civil society interests and public policy issues as fed in by the GAC

BB - Will work on text for this part. Recap of the issue of  public interest.. AND WILL CIRCUTLATE TO THE GROUP


BB - consumer trust - re concordance - will work with staff for next meeting.. DM will work on the Private Sector leadership and GAC consideration advice.. BB will work on global public interest (note KA request to participate)..

BB - appreciate participation.

AG - interested on public interest and consumer trust

Documents Presented

Chat Transcript

Brenda Brewer: (10/2/2015 06:33) Welcome to WP2 Meeting #12 on 2 October 2015!   Please note that chat sessions are being archived and follow the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior: 

  Becky Burr: (06:57) good morning

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (06:57) I will need a dial out a few minute sinto the covnersation so I can drive the kids to school please

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (06:57) good morning

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (06:57) Morning, Becky.   Wil be on and off Adobe as I am traveling this morning.  Will dial in for a portion of the call.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (06:58) Hi Beckie

  Kavouss Arasteh: (06:59) Hi every body

  Kavouss Arasteh: (06:59) Tks Breda for the schedule

  Brenda Brewer: (07:00) You're welcome Kavouss.

  David McAuley: (07:01) Good morning all

  David McAuley: (07:02) I heard bad noise and hear you

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (07:02) terrible echo

  Brenda Brewer: (07:02) working on echo

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:02) Good evening everyone from Singapore

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (07:02) yes Becky

  David McAuley: (07:02) I think it is fixd

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:02) I hear you without any echo Becky

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:04) Becky if possible, could you speak up a bit more

  David McAuley: (07:04) I hear you well

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:04) a bit louder would be good

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:05) volume is good herem, up the volume on your computer?

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:05) mine is on max

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:05) ok

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:06) headset?

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:06) yes using headset

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:07) it's better now, I hope Becky can stay at this level

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:07) if your computer has speakers you may want to test those to see if the problem is the headset

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:07) ok

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:08) Becky

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:09) pls repeat the CCWG REFERENCE no.

  Becky Burr: (07:10) paragraph 187 Kavouss

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:10) Beckie

  Avri Doria: (07:11) is Alan's  "these people" in reference to NCSG?

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:11) There may be a need to streamline and refine the language used as it is not very clear as appeared

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:12) We should use a cleasr language avoiding misiterpretation

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:13) The points made by Alan seem quite sensible

  Gonzalo Navarro: (07:13) I´m having problems to reach the call.

  Brenda Brewer: (07:14) Gonzalo, please see private chat from me

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:14) Could we share the text we are specifically talking about on the screen?

  Alan Greenberg: (07:14) Add not including domain name identifiers.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:14) Becky

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:15) echo

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:15) Instead of talking around the subject we need to put the text on the screen and in a Screen share fashion edit it

  Erika Mann: (07:15) Apologies for being late!

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:15) Too many opinion were said in general manner but we need specific edits

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:16) +1 Kavouss, it would be useful to have paragraph 187 up here and see how to edit

  Gonzalo Navarro: (07:16) Apologies but I need to go

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:16) +1 again

  Alan Greenberg: (07:17) 187 ICANN shall have no power to act other than in accordance with, and as reasonably appropriate to achieve its Mission. Without in any way limiting the foregoing absolute prohibition, ICANN shall not engage in or use its powers to attempt the regulation of services that use the Internet's unique identifiers, or the content that they carry or provide.

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:17) thanks Alan

  Avri Doria: (07:18) um, that might prompt new comments.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:19) What  is " absolute prohibition "

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:19) The language is not clear

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:19) Is there an analysis of the public comments available on this paragraph?

  Avri Doria: (07:20) i do not recommend langauge that allows censorship in the the identifier spce.

  Avri Doria: (07:20) for example gay is a bad word in many cultures, shoudl ICANN be allowed to restrict its use?

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:22) Thanks Becky: shouldn't we have these comments -issue per issue- on a paper and the options for the CCWG on possible options how to adress the comments?

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (07:22) @David -- use Excel sheet

  Avri Doria: (07:22) i thought they sent out a n excel?

  David McAuley: (07:22) Thanks Steve - will try it

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (07:22) The excel is horroble

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (07:23) cant be openend in Google docs

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:23) Carlos+1

  Avri Doria: (07:23) works fine in excel and openoffice

  Greg Shatan: (07:23) I don't think we're looking to increase ICANN's powers with regard to unique identifiers.  I think we are just looking not to restrict them in this area.

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (07:23) dont use MS produce

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (07:24) and in any case, escel wasn´t thought for realtional text quotes, at least in the begining

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (07:24) Please kavouss

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:24) Dear Becky: Thanks Becky: shouldn't we have these comments -issue per issue- on a paper and the options for the CCWG on possible options how to adress the comments?

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:24) Becky, could you elaborate on "foregoing absolute prohibition"

  David McAuley: (07:24) Language in the nature of explicit prohibition is not unusual in legal docs in many countries

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:24) We need this in writing, otherwise the rationale for decisions by this WP is not traceable

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:25) Brend a

  Avri Doria: (07:25) Carlos - also works in LibreOffice

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:25) Para 187 has received for example important comments by the UK Government, which we understand and could support

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:25) I was interupted PLS DIAL ME UP AND ALLOPW ME TO UNDERSTAND THE REPLY

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:26) mY LINE IS INTERRUPTED

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:26) Hello

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:26) Brenda

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:26) My line is interrupted

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:27) Alice, Brenda and other staff

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:27) I am interrupted

  Greg Shatan: (07:27) I think Kavouss is missing this answer.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:27) I am not connected

  Avri Doria: (07:28) Once we get to the NCSG recommendation we see a recommendation for simplifying the langauge

  Brenda Brewer: (07:28) will call Kavouss back

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:28) Thanks Becky. 

  David McAuley: (07:28) on mute

  Avri Doria: (07:28) we recommend:  “ICANN shall not engage in or use its powers to regulate services that use the Internet's unique identifiers, or the content that they carry or provide."

  Avri Doria: (07:29) I would ask that we not make changes based on one comment without considering other offsetting comments

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:30) We should delete all qualifier

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:30) Dear Becky

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:31) I appologize I have not been able to have an asnwer to my question

  David McAuley: (07:31) I like the directnes of the language @Avri but do we not also need an explict statement that Mission creep is not authorized rather than taking that implicitly as it must be

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:31) The text is very vagues

  Becky Burr: (07:32) Please keep in mind that there have been many, strong statements of support for this concept particularly in the first comment round. 

  David McAuley: (07:32) Good point @Becky

  Becky Burr: (07:32) the fact that the support was not repeated in the second comment round does not suggest any diminution in support

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:33) The text should be as Follows:

  Becky Burr: (07:34) yes,  ICANN claims it is not a regulator but IMHO the fact that it has power to impose Consensus Policy unilaterally means to me that it is a regulator

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:35) icann shall act in accordance with its mission and shall not be engaged in or attempt to regulate the services that use the Internet ;s unique identifier ,or the content that they carry or provide

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:36) Beckie

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:36) I propose an alternative text

  Becky Burr: (07:36) you are next Kavouss

  Avri Doria: (07:37) the languagee i put was from the NCSG comments

  David McAuley: (07:37) ICANN shall have no power to act other than in accordance with, and as reasonably appropriate to achieve its Mission. Without in any way limiting the foregoing prohibition, ICANN shall not use its powers to regulate services that use the Internet’s unique identifiers, or the content that they carry or provide. For the avoidance of doubt this provision does not imply that ICANN shall not be able to etc etc (PICS, contract provisions, UDRP, URS)

  Erika Mann: (07:37) How about talking about self-regulation?

  Avri Doria: (07:37) and do not think we should change the langauge based on only one comment.

  Avri Doria: (07:38) NCSG was willing to accept the current langauge, but if we change it, would argue fr tightr langauge.

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:38) Please add for the record in the Notes of the meeting: I have an issue of process. According to the Roadmap distributed by the Co-Chairs up to Dublin we should identify areas of consensus, areas of refinemente, areas of divergence and potential options. We should do this in writing.

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:39) Otherwise, as has happened before, the decisions taken by this WP are not traceable for people not able to participate.

  Becky Burr: (07:39) I believe that is what we are attempting to do Jorge

  David McAuley: (07:40) I have no objection to changing "ICANN shall have no power to act" to "ICANN shall not act"

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:41) Dear Becky: we need this in writing, before jumping to discussions on wording

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:41) Tks Dave

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:41) There is a problem with my connection, sorry

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:43) Beckie, the problem is using those two qualifiers that considerable weakened the message and put some degree of subjectiveness ,moreover, the term 2 without limiting the forgoing limitation 2 is interpretable and may not be useful

  David McAuley: (07:43) Becky, one idea for following WP2 calls is that you identify areas for suggested work as you did here and we gather volunteers to take them on one-by-one and they agree to do e-mail set up for following calls – the e-mail could describe the issue and proposed resolution and that should address Jorge’s concern of written trail

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:44) thanks David - WP1 is starting with that approach

  Avri Doria: (07:44) note: to the extent that we beleive the AGB actually  accurately reflected consensus policy. something i do not fully accept.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:45) Any volunteer is kindly requested to avoid using qualifier and the part that I put between two "" which was wrongly appeared as two 2

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:46)  Kavouss is willing

  David McAuley: (07:46) I can work w Greg but was distaretec when the summary was stated

  David McAuley: (07:46) distracted that is

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:46) I AM INTRESTED ALSO

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:47) many thanks to the volunteers

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:47) Greg

  Greg Shatan: (07:47) I will take a first pass at this and then circulate to David and Kavouss.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:47)  I WILL BE ALSO INTERESTED

  David McAuley: (07:47) Thanks Greg

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:48) I WAS ALSO WANTED TO BE WITH THEM

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:49) Greg

  Greg Shatan: (07:49) Kavouss, you will be included.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:49)  do you disagree that I work with you on that text

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:49)  if the answer is yes then why

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:50) which language pls beckie

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:50) put the language on the screen

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:51) MAY i have the text under consideration

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:51) pls put it on the screen

  Asha Hemrajani: (07:52) staff, could we have the relevant paragraph on the screen

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:52) Asha + 1

  Greg Shatan: (07:52) Quelle surprise.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:53) GREG

  Greg Shatan: (07:53) Yes, Kavouss?

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:54)  Quelle surpise oen quoi?

  Greg Shatan: (07:54) That the BC found the language that Steve helped draft to be acceptable.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:54) wHAT DO YOU MEAN BY " qUELLE sURPRISE"

  Greg Shatan: (07:55) IF the BC had disapproved of the language, I would have been quite surprised.  So that was an ironic *Quelle Surprise.*

  Greg Shatan: (07:56) 7. ICANN commits to adhere to transparent and accountable budgeting processes, fact-based policy development, cross-community deliberations, and responsive consultation procedures that provide detailed explanations of the basis for decisions, including how comments have influenced the development of policy consideration, and to publish each year an annual report that sets out ICANN's progress against ICANN's bylaws, responsibilities, and strategic and operating plans. In addition, ICANN commits to provide a thorough and reasoned explanation of decisions taken, the rationale thereof and the sources of data and information on which ICANN relied.

  Greg Shatan: (07:56) I've just pasted number 7 in the chat.

  David McAuley: (07:56) starts discussion at paras 505 and 506

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:56) dEAR bECKIE

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (07:56) redline is nit visible

  Greg Shatan: (07:57) I see redline on the screen.

  David McAuley: (07:57) 537 also talks of this

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:58) 218-19

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (07:58) 1     4. Depending on market mechanisms to promote and sustain a healthy competitive environment in the DNS market. 2        4. Depending Where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms to promote and sustain a healthy competitive environment in the DNS market that enhances consumer trust and choice.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:59) The use of the verb "Will " is not correct since  the verb is deterministic thus is not legally proper since we should use the mandatory language and not  deterministic language

  Kavouss Arasteh: (07:59) What is the legal support that ICANN "WILL 2 DO THAT .

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:00) wE NEED TO SAY, icann shall or shall not do ....e

  David McAuley: (08:00) Thank you Becky, that sounds like a good idea

  Asha Hemrajani: (08:01) Thanks Greg for pasting #7 and thanks Becky for that suggestion

  Greg Shatan: (08:02) Here's 3

  Greg Shatan: (08:02) 3. This document affirms key commitments by DOC and ICANN, including commitments to: (a) ensure that decisions made related to the global technical coordination of the DNS are made in the public interest and are accountable and transparent; (b) preserve the security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; (c) promote competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice in the DNS marketplace; and (d) facilitate international participation in DNS technical coordination.

  Greg Shatan: (08:04) There is quite a breadth of opinion among legal drafters over the proper use of shall, will, must and may.

  Greg Shatan: (08:08) I think we all seem to be part of the volunteer society.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:09) I OBJECT to the interpretation made by Alan

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:09) Governments are not part of private sector

  David McAuley: (08:09) and sometimes, Greg, the voluntold society

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:10) I have serious problem with this expression that put everything under private sector

  Avri Doria: (08:10) I do not beleive there is any requirement for ICANN to use Tunis Agenda based definitons.

  David McAuley: (08:10) Agree w/Avri

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:11)  How you considered that Government's advice is inconsistent with Bylaws in a categoric manner advice usal

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:12) Pls kindly do not take such a hard position against governments

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:12) I wish to be part of the small group but not rapporteur for this text

  Alan Greenberg: (08:13) When re-writing, please factor in ALAC and other comments related to "civil society" and users.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:14) Alan

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:14) You complicate the issue

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:15) Please include in the notes, that we support a wording in Commitment number 5 that recognizes in that Commitment that Governments participate in the bottom-up public policy process and provide their advice to ICANN Board

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:15) +1 This is a complication

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:16) We could say that civil sosiety , private sector, technical community and accademia and governments  per the relevant desscrition and/ or invlovementsc

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:16) Alan is this it - • Paragraph 154, Bullet 2 (and referencing paragraphs 205 and 234): The ALAC strongly supports the minority position that Users or End-Users must be explicitly referenced

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:16) Sorry no mic, just that goig into multiple definiotns is a complication

  Alan Greenberg: (08:17) For instance, a group that advocates open source or profives end-user training to some specific sector often do not consider themselves civil society.

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:18) Civil society is the "aggregate of non-governmental organizations and institutions that manifest interests and will of citizens." Civil society includes the family and the private sphere, referred to as the "third sector" of society, distinct from government and business.

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:19) Dear Becky and Staff: please include the following suggestion in the Notes: jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: We support a wording in Commitment number 5 that recognizes in that Commitment that Governments participate in the bottom-up public policy process and provide their advice to ICANN Board

  Greg Shatan: (08:19) When outside counsel gets ahold of this, they may be able to help us from a drafting perspective in finding the appropriate way and place to clarify what we mean when we say "private sector" and "civil society." 

  Greg Shatan: (08:22) Just call me "LIttle Mary Sunshine."

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:24) Any attepmt to undermine  the role or  subordinate GAC under any other community or category of the society is rejected

  Greg Shatan: (08:25) Kavouss, what re you referring to in particular?

  Asha Hemrajani: (08:26) Could staff please show the text under discussion

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:26) aLAN

  David McAuley: (08:26) Maybe tie public interest to the benefit of the Internet community as a whole (language from Art. IV of ICANN’s articles of incorp.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:27) Whether we have not put in practice the button-up approach it is always claimed that we are doing

  David McAuley: (08:27) Art. IV says in part: "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"

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:28) Agreed Becky

  David McAuley: (08:28) Agree w/Becky

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:29) Agree with Becky.  If this is bottom-up, then it is bottom-up.

  Greg Shatan: (08:29) I don't think we are giving the board a trump card unless the Board has the sole and absolute discretion to define the public interest, without challenge from the community.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:29) Board has changed pdp policy before (Ex: TM+50)

  Greg Shatan: (08:30) That was implementation :-)

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:30) yes, under "board discretion", the implmentation of "exact match only" can be +50". 

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:30) ??

  Avri Doria: (08:31) while i support the puublic interest, i do not think it appropriate to give the Board a trump card to decide on what it is.  it is  a bottom-up  repsonsiblity.  and removing bottom-up from ICANN is unacceptable.

  David McAuley: (08:31) I have not heard that suggestion Kavouss

  Becky Burr: (08:31) no one is saying the GAC is part of the private sector Kavouss

  Alan Greenberg: (08:31) Robin, no one is disputing what the board has done in the past. The issue is how to properly restrict it.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:31) yES LOOK THE TEXT IT SAYS SO IMPLICITLY

  Becky Burr: (08:34) I would have thought that the goal is to look to process and not to a litigation of whether the policy servces the "global public interest"

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:34) One way out would be to delete every thing after procwsses till seek

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:34) I do not see giovernment there

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:34) Did I miss something pls

  Becky Burr: (08:34) isn't that a source of endless dispute

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:34) the words "global public interest" have been invoked by ICANN the way the words "national security" are invoked to end discussion

  Alan Greenberg: (08:35) Take a look  at a GNSP PDP where user interests are in opposition to interests of contracted parties who have lots of money at stake. Users are badly outnumbered.

  Greg Shatan: (08:35) Robin -- we need to attack that head on.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:35) agreed.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:37) bECKIE

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:37) The language is not exclusionary

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:38) Dear Becky: this organisation has evolved since its inception. At least the Government role should be included under Commitment number 5, as I suggested before

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:38) That was written many years ago and by one single government wthat wanted to be the sole stewwardship of the whole process but we are changing that process

  David McAuley: (08:39) very feint Robin

  David McAuley: (08:40) hard to hear

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:40) Pls note that many governments are not in agreement with retentain of the superirity or domination of Private Sector

  David McAuley: (08:40) that's better

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:40) what is better

  David McAuley: (08:41) the audio was quite low Kavous, at least here

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:41) understood and tks

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:43) Agree with Robin that the bottom-up process is our way to ascertain the public interest within ICANN, but the right mix and the right balance is key, including the fair consideration of civil society interests and public policy issues as fed in by the GAC

  Greg Shatan: (08:43) FYI, I'm taking time off from work to do this and doing this largely on my own dime....  My powerful funding must be in the mail.

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:44) Yes there are I believe, Robin will know more

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:44) Greg then your doing it wrong =)

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:44) ICANN has issued "public interest committments".  Perhaps we could see some of ICANN internal research about how the public interest is defined.

  Becky Burr: (08:44) thanks, Greg.  mail is unreliable I fear.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:45) jORGE, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY"as fed in by the GAC"

  Alan Greenberg: (08:46) My understanding is that Nora Abusitta, whose title is VP, Development and Public Respinsbility Programs, is about to launch a process to  define (or whatever) the Global Public Interest.

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:46) Dear Kavouss: I mean the public policy INPUT or ADVICE or views, etc - I wasn't drafting a legal document, but just expressing an idea

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:47) we need to have a bottom up decision making for public interest, but there must be checks on that also.  What if the ICANN community decides it is in the public interest to hang someone up his ankles?  We have to have some kind of boundaries as well.

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:47) HR Robin?

  Greg Shatan: (08:48) James, you may be right, but it keeps my SOI simple.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:48)  bECKY


  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:49) Dear Becky: I volunteer also (although this begins to be suicidal, he, he) for that effort

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:49) =)

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:49) Staff I disagree with that conclusion say" JC - he bottom-up process is our way to ascertain the public interest within ICANN, but the right mix and the right balance is key, including the fair consideration of civil society interests and public policy issues as fed in by the GAC"

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:49) As the meaning is not clear

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:50) Pls remove that from the summary I disagree with that pls

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:50) Kavouss: it's my opinion, not staff's

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:50) Kavouss: you cannot remove my suggestion

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:50) I do not know what do you mean .

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:50) we can discuss further

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:50) It is your opinion but the meaning is vague

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:51) It is not clear

  Greg Shatan: (08:51) I think Kavouss is with DM and me.

  Greg Shatan: (08:51) on p. 187

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:51) I was talking with Jorge asking to clarify his comment

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:52) Kavouss: we can improve the text of course. It's just a thought. It means that the policy development process in ICANN is done by the private sector, civil society and the public sector

  David McAuley: (08:52) I agree Greg, I think you take first pass, send to me and I send. w cmy comments to Kavouss

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:53) Yes that is true

  Kavouss Arasteh: (08:53) I will appreciate to work in both little groups

  Asha Hemrajani: (08:53) Becky, please could you send the text to me as well

  Asha Hemrajani: (08:53) I meant the text you are planning to circulate on the independent review.  Thanks.

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (08:54) Becky: i´m interested in the global public interst dicussion as well

  Carlos Raul (GNSO): (08:54) please take note

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:55) Dear Becky: please count me in for your tiny group

  David McAuley: (08:55) Thanks Becky, staff, and all

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (08:55) Thanks, Becky, and all, bye!!

  James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]: (08:55) thanks all

  jorge cancio (GAC CH) 2: (08:56) thanks and regards to all!

  Asha Hemrajani: (08:56) Thank you Becky.  Good to be here

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:56) bye all

  Greg Shatan: (08:56) Thank you all!

  Becky Burr: (08:56) will do

  Becky Burr: (08:56) thanks everyone

  • No labels