Sub-group Members:  Avri Doria, David Einhorn, David McAuley, Ellen Blackler, Gary Hunt, Greg Shatan, Leon Sanchez, Markus Kummer, Matthew Shears, Niels ten Oever, Robin Gross, Tatiana Tropina

Staff:  Bernie Turcotte, Brenda Brewer, Trang Nguyen

Apologies:  Seun Ojedeji

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




Google Doc Link:

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

•  Poll Results

•  Review analysis document from Neils and Tatiana

Results of survey:

Question 1 - Should there be a reference to a specific document in the Bylaws text regarding human rights proposed by the CCWG (Yes or No)?

Question 2 - If a document reference is included should it be the UDHR (yes or no)?

Question 3 - If not UDHR what other document or documents should be referred to (list)?

Results of WP4 Poll

Q1 Yes  -  5

     No   -  18

Q2 Yes  -  11

     No   -  12

Q3 None or NA  -  13

     Not Sure  -  3

For Q3 - details

  International bill of human rights , Regional and Domestic commitments to same.

·        my read is if one answers 1 and 2 with No then 3 is irrelevant.   I note that some others have, however, put in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights for 3 even though they have said no to 1 and 2.

·        that is be guided by the Guiding Principles on business and human rights

·        The UDHR is the only instrument that is of sufficient universality.

·        The UDHR is the only instrument that is of sufficient universality.

·        UDHR & UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

·        UDHR & UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights






·        UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights


Tatiana noted full results of the poll should be included in the report.

Analysis Document -

Introduction edits by GS supported by authors and participants.

Action Item = Staff to look at transcript from the LA meeting regarding the HR issue and distribute to WP4.

Introduction is accepted with the exception of the Board comment on HR from the LA meeting.

Areas of Consensus

WP4 rough consensus is recommended to be moved to the Option section.

discussion of process for creating document to match other such documents.


Areas of Divergence

Editing text.

Point 2 - GS notes this suggestion may be problematic. Edited.

Options for CCWG Consideration

Point 2 has similar problems as above. GS has significant concerns. We should not be trying to interpret how Art 4 applies to human rights in this group. Agree to remove the comment  under 2.

Point 3 - discussion.

Wrap up.

Agreed to introduction. areas of consensus, areas needing further refinement and Divergence.

Need to complete discussion on last two bullets in  Options for CCWG Consideration. WP4 will work on the list to complete the document for 12th.



Action Item

Action Item = Staff to look at transcript from the LA meeting regarding the HR issue and distribute to WP4.

Documents Presented

HumanRightLanguageinICANNsbylawsforWP4 (1).pdf

Chat Transcript

  Brenda Brewer: (10/8/2015 15:23) Welcome all to WP4 Meeting #7 on 8th October 2015 @ 21:00 UTC!  Please note that chat sessions are being archived and follow the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior: 

  b: (15:59) hi all

  Niels ten Oever: (16:00) Hi all

  David McAuley: (16:00) Hello again

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:01) Hi all

  Markus Kummer: (16:01) Hi all

  Niels ten Oever: (16:03) yes

  b: (16:04) Neils can I have the URL for the Google doc

  Niels ten Oever: (16:04)

  b: (16:04) thanks

  David McAuley: (16:05) so this is just an explanatory document as I understand (saying as a UDHR proponent in the minority)

  David McAuley: (16:07) +1 Greg

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:09) Thanks for the great job, Greg!

  David McAuley: (16:09) is it just me or does Google docs not point the comment to the specific section being commented upon - I dont see the linkages

  David McAuley: (16:10) ok thanks Greg

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:11) I replaced them for the sake of consistency :)

  David McAuley: (16:11) I see them largely as being more precise and that is good

  David McAuley: (16:12) +1 Tatiana

  David McAuley: (16:19) Those approaches make sense, Greg

  David McAuley: (16:21) Good to go from my perspective

  Greg Shatan: (16:21) David, if you click on the particular comment you will see the linkage.

  David McAuley: (16:22) I tried that - need toi try it again

  David McAuley: (16:22) OK Greg, it works, I must have not clicked it well last time

  David McAuley: (16:23) thanks

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:24) I am ok with Greg's sugegstion.

  David McAuley: (16:25) I am too

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:25) May be we create this section in the specific part?

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:25) or well just a paragraph will be better probably

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:26) People should be used to 174536 acronyms already at ICANN, so a couple of new won't make any harm :)

  David McAuley: (16:27) +1 Niels

  David McAuley: (16:28) I see your point Niels but think I still agree w/Greg

  Niels ten Oever: (16:29) But that is now also the case, right?

  b: (16:30) Greg is reporting how it has been handled in other documents

  David McAuley: (16:31) Leon, you are sometimes hard to hear

  David McAuley: (16:31) uh oh

  David McAuley: (16:31) uh oh

  David McAuley: (16:32) lost a good chunk of audio at this end

  Leon Sanchez: (16:32) me too

  Leon Sanchez: (16:32) audio has been fuzzy

  David McAuley: (16:32) That is better Leon

  Leon Sanchez: (16:34) :-)

  Niels ten Oever: (16:36) Yes

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:36) Niels, how can we give Greg editing rights?

  Niels ten Oever: (16:36) I can give Greg editing rights

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:36) I also coulnd't eddit - only suggest

  Niels ten Oever: (16:37) Should I enable editing rights for everyone?

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:37) Niels is the owner :)

  Niels ten Oever: (16:37) Or just for Greg?

  Greg Shatan: (16:37) It needs to be re-shared with editing rights to do so.

  Niels ten Oever: (16:37)

  Greg Shatan: (16:41) As a process point, I suggest using "edit" only to move text.  Any additions or deletions should be made in "suggest" mode so they can be seen by others in the WP.  That's the method I will follow.

  Niels ten Oever: (16:42) +1 agree

  Niels ten Oever: (16:42) will do so too

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:42) Agree too

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:42) good point

  David McAuley: (16:43) The text seems fine but I take it that placement will be possibly changed

  David McAuley: (16:44) on mute?

  Niels ten Oever: (16:44) You're right

  Niels ten Oever: (16:44) So remove

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:44) yep.

  David McAuley: (16:45) agreed no need to keep hammering it

  Niels ten Oever: (16:46) Looking it up

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:47) oops have to look

  Niels ten Oever: (16:47) Yes - pls go on

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:47) afnic

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:49) I wonder if we have to express our opinion concerning WS1 vs. WS2?

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:51) Niels, +1

  b: (16:51) Niels - undeer the microphone icon at the top of the Adobe page you will find Adjust Microphone Volume and please lower 25

  b: (16:51) %

  b: (16:53) Niels can you mute

  b: (16:54) thanks , lowering you rmike volume would also be appreciated

  Niels ten Oever: (16:54) @B - lowered thanks.

  b: (16:54) thanks

  Niels ten Oever: (16:55) Who is editing now?

  Tatiana Tropina: (16:55) Greg I assume?

  Niels ten Oever: (16:58) my hand is not working

  Niels ten Oever: (16:59) audio dropping

  Niels ten Oever: (16:59) Adobe Connect seems to be unstable

  David McAuley: (17:00) I agree with Nie;ls

  David McAuley: (17:00) Niels - very unstable right now

  b: (17:00) +1

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:00) I have no problem but I am on the phone as well....

  Gary Hunt - UK Government: (17:00) Many long drop outs...

  b: (17:01) @Gary - same here

  Matthew Shears: (17:01) same here

  Avri Doria: (17:02) this time i forgot after a day of runing around chasing a visa and then gettign in caught in the news about cruise missiles. apologies again.

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:02) may be quote them?

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:02) oh ok suggested already

  Matthew Shears: (17:02) agree

  Niels ten Oever: (17:03) excellent

  Niels ten Oever: (17:03) agree

  David McAuley: (17:03) Hi Avri, we are working toward agreeing this document as an explanatory document to be presented to the CCWG

  Greg Shatan: (17:03) ICANN is aiming cruise missiles at the CCWG?!?!?!?

  Avri Doria: (17:04) Thanks David.

  David McAuley: (17:04) of late we have had some adobe instability as well

  Avri Doria: (17:05) as one of the commenters who did not thin it contains such a committment.

  Avri Doria: (17:05) that would be a mistake since it isn't there.

  Avri Doria: (17:06) some beive that [----

  Niels ten Oever: (17:06) I think it's more than 'some' based on mailinglist discussion

  Matthew Shears: (17:07) "woudl make more explicit"

  Avri Doria: (17:08) it was NTIA oversight that guaranteed it,(alteast foe and open gflow of information) not the Articles

  David McAuley: (17:08) I think Greg's observations are correct about the current state of things

  b: (17:09) Avri lower your mike volume under the microphone icon at the top of the Adobe page

  b: (17:09) Please

  Niels ten Oever: (17:10) Incorrect

  Niels ten Oever: (17:10) Lawyers told us that it was I think

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:10) are we discussing the sentence starting with "WP4 believes"?

  David McAuley: (17:11) I think the one begining "there is broad agreement"

  Niels ten Oever: (17:11) no

  Niels ten Oever: (17:11) WP4 recognises that states have human rights obligations under the international law. However, while it’s a duty of the state to respect, protect and fulfil human rights, private sector is required to comply with all applicable laws, including without limitation those related to human rights. There is a broad agreement within the group that the [intent] for the Bylaw amendment would aim toill reaffirm ICANN’s commitment to carry out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of international law and applicable international conventions operate in conformity comply with the international law in its operations, which already exists in the Art. 4 of ICANN’s Article of Incorporation. The amendment is not aimed to impose any duty to enforce human rights.

  Niels ten Oever: (17:11) That sentence is discussed

  David McAuley: (17:12) None here

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:12) thanks Niels. The audio problems here on my side now somehow :(

  Matthew Shears: (17:13) international law does not necessarily include human rights it depoends on interporetation so the addition of human rights is useful

  David McAuley: (17:14) The nanosecond postulate

  Avri Doria: (17:15) heraclitus knew noting of the CCWG

  Niels ten Oever: (17:15) This is a quote, right?

  Avri Doria: (17:15) yes

  Niels ten Oever: (17:16) So, how is this interpreting?

  Avri Doria: (17:16) oh whait, which is a quote

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:17) I have a suggestion re Greg is saying

  Niels ten Oever: (17:17) Art. 4 of the Articles of Incorporation outlines the general obligation to carry out the activities in conformity with international conventions and local law

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:17) re what Greg is saying sorry for typo :)

  Avri Doria: (17:17) and isn't that a statement that needs interpresrtion.  it is an interpretation to say what the includes and what it does, annd it is a interretation that depends on local and notional law.

  Avri Doria: (17:19) Art 4 is only a committment to HR after HR is added as a bylaw.

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:20) :) not in thise sentence. we can delete the comment, I done have any particular attachment to it :)

  Niels ten Oever: (17:20) We cannot simply strike it and leave it unaddressed, right?

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:20) yep, just a suggestion will be fine, Strike it

  Niels ten Oever: (17:20) Because it was a comment

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:21) may be we comemnt that we submit it for consideration?

  Niels ten Oever: (17:21) We can say: WP4 prefers to address this in the bylaw.

  Niels ten Oever: (17:21) Without the whole art4 discussion

  Matthew Shears: (17:21) adding a clause to areticle 4 was seen as an alternatie to the bylaw if the latter was not suported for whatever reason

  Matthew Shears: (17:21) + 1 Niels

  David McAuley: (17:21) I like Niels approach just stated

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:21) +1 to Niels

  Matthew Shears: (17:22) yes

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:22) Matthew will disagree - I believe it's his comment

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:22) oh :)

  Matthew Shears: (17:22) no I agree - and yes we made the suggestion

  Matthew Shears: (17:22) agree with Niels suggestion

  David McAuley: (17:22) That's what I thought you meant Leon

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:23) Then I am happy with everything (till the next bullet point)

  ellen blackler: (17:23) can you restate the current proposal

  ellen blackler: (17:23) thx

  Niels ten Oever: (17:23) WP4 believes  that it is more appropriate to address ICANN’s human rights commitment in the Bylaws.

  David McAuley: (17:24) No objection

  David McAuley: (17:24) Good save Greg

  b: (17:25) note 5 minutes left in the call

  Niels ten Oever: (17:25) This comes from a comment

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:25) Can I address?

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:25) ok Niels could you find the comment?

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:26) the last two points didn't come from the comments actually but from our assessment, by the way

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:26) Thanks Greg for editing

  Avri Doria: (17:27) i keep losing connectity.  my question is about the bracketd langauge.

  David McAuley: (17:28) This adobe session has been a bit of a struggle

  Greg Shatan: (17:28) @Avri, I don't disagree.  I just feel that this option needs to be expressed more clearly.

  David McAuley: (17:28) Unusual - adobe is normally quite good

  Niels ten Oever: (17:29) Cannot find the comment back

  David McAuley: (17:29) I agree it could be more clear

  Avri Doria: (17:29) and i see no manner of interpretation where repsect include enforcement.  we would nee d to be explict about enforcement if that was what we intened.

  Avri Doria: (17:29) my repsect for the law give me no power of enforcement

  b: (17:30) bye all

  Matthew Shears: (17:30) yes it is not that clear a sentence

  David McAuley: (17:30) Yes - thanks to those three fine folks for lots of writing

  Niels ten Oever: (17:30) What are the next steps?

  Niels ten Oever: (17:30) The deadline is almost upon us, no?

  Markus Kummer: (17:31) Bye all!

  Niels ten Oever: (17:31) How will we agree, in a next call?

  Greg Shatan: (17:31) I will move stuff around so that we have the options at the back, with a distinction between comment options and ours.

  David McAuley: (17:31) That sounds good Greg

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:31) Thanks Greg

  David McAuley: (17:32) lets see if we can do that as Leon suggests

  Gary Hunt - UK Government: (17:32) Good night from London...

  David McAuley: (17:32) Thanks Leon, thanks all and bye

  Greg Shatan: (17:32) Bye all!

  Matthew Shears: (17:32) thanks

  Tatiana Tropina: (17:32) Good night all!

  • No labels