Sub-group Members:  Andreea Brambilla, Anne Aikman-Scalese, Avri Doria, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Daniel Appelman, David McAuley, Erich Schweighofer, Greg Shatan, Griffin Barnett, Harold Arcos, Janet Shih Hajek, Javier Rua-Jovet, John Laprise, Kavouss Arasteh, Leon Sanchez, Markus Kummer, Niels ten Oever, Paul McGrady, Robin Gross, Rudi Daniel, Tatiana Tropina   (21)

Observers/Guests:  Iren Borissova, Taylor Bentley

StaffBerry Cobb, Brenda Brewer, Elizabeth Andrews, Karen Mulberry, Mary Wong, Nathalie Vergnolle, Tristana Webster   (7)

Apologies:  Jorge Cancio, Corrine Cath, Herb Waye

** If your name is missing from attendance or apology, please send note to **




1. Administrivia

    •  Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
    •  Discussion of FoI during plenary on Wednesday 14 – 13:00 UTC

2. Analysis and discussion on the progress of the drafting team working on the Human Rights Policy and Process Questions

  a. The policies and frameworks, if any, that ICANN needs to develop or enhance in order to fulfill its commitment to respect Human Rights

  b. Consistent with ICANN’s existing processes and protocols, consider how these new frameworks should be discussed and drafted to ensure broad multistakeholder involvement in the process


      Consider how the interpretation and implementation of this Bylaw will interact with existing and future ICANN policies and procedures.

  c. Consider what effect, if any, this Bylaw will have on ICANN’s

consideration of advice given by the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)

3. AOB

Notes: (including relevant portions of the chat): 

1. Administrivia 

 Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 

Kavouss Arasteh: During the entire ICG,CWG,CCWG ,IOT,IRP ,,There has not been any chair so kind, balanced, patient, skillful and neutral as Niels. Congradulations Niels. 

Audio only: no participants. 

Roll call will be taken from the AC room

No SOI updates

 Discussion of FoI during plenary on Wednesday 14 – 13:00 UTC

Niels unable to attend the plenary tomorrow. 

Tatiana and Greg will be attending and presenting the FoI.

Encouraging subgroup participants to attend in order to support discussions in the plenary.

Status of Legal questions:

Waiting to hear back from ICANN Legal re: legal questions raised.

2. Analysis and discussion on the progress of the drafting team working on the Human Rights Policy and Process Questions

Draft document can be found here:[]

     a. The policies and frameworks, if any, that ICANN needs to develop or enhance in order to fulfill its commitment to respect Human Rights

Niels read the section 

Kavouss:"ICANN can prioritize" - could we replace 'can' by 'should'? 

DM disagrees. This document is complex and needs a preamble. 

Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): Agree with David on the change in meaning that comes with change from "can" to "should".

Tatiana: let's rephrase it to say it is a suggestion from the group for ICANN to prioritize.

Kavouss: "is consistent"; we don't know that it is consistent. change done 

Anne: the sentence still sounds a little akward, should be worked on off-line.

ACTION (Subgroup): continue to work on this sentence on the mailing list and in Google doc.   

     b. Consistent with ICANN’s existing processes and protocols, consider how these new frameworks should be discussed and drafted to ensure 
          broad multistakeholder involvement in the process


                Consider how the interpretation and implementation of this Bylaw will interact with existing and future ICANN policies and procedures.

Niels read the section.

Kavouss: I have difficulties with the word "substantive"

Niels: text in quotes is strictly for the GNSO

David McAuley (RySG): agree w/Niels and GNSO policies should be treated as they usually are, should not imply change that process in this document. 

Paul McGrady: we should not limit this section to GNSO.

Tatiana Tropina: the question is about policies and processes, so we have to think about AC 

David McAuley (RySG): I suggest that this document in no way imply a change to how GNSO policy is presently developed and approved in ICANN.

Niels: should we try to include all SO/ACs?

Paul: we want the FoI to be applicable to all SO/ACs 

Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): Actually all gTLD policy is developed at the GNSO - not just "substantive" policies.  Agree other SOs and ACs have input to that 
process and the GAC in particular has direct input to the Board.

Greg: agrees with Anne, should say 'any policy' rather than 'substantive'

ACTION (subgroup): add some substance to the document related to other SO/ACs 

Tatiana: There is mention of GAC further down in the document, so seems like GAC is covered already.

Mary Wong: The Bylaws spell out the scope of the GNSO and ccNSO policy processes very clearly, including who can participate in a ccNSO PDP, 
initiate one etc. The ASO's mechanisms are quite different from either the ccNSO or the GNSO as well.

Greg Shatan: "policies and frameworks". This needs to be given further thought.

Mary Wong: The ASO policy process is spelled out in the MOU between ICANN and the NRO. On frameworks, there is now the Framework of Principles 
for Future CCWGs (recently adopted by the ccNSO and GNSO).

Kavouss: "multistakeholder" repetition - text needs to be simplified. 

     c. Consider what effect, if any, this Bylaw will have on ICANN’s consideration of advice given by the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)

Niels read the section.

Kavouss: 4th line "and interpreted" should be "and implemented". The phrase could be simpler.

Greg: we should continue to work on interpretation vs implementation. It's not the purpose of this group to mandate implementation.

Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): "The different SOs whould consider incorporating HRIAs in THEIR PDPs, not "its".  After that sentence ,the references 
to "will" should be "would" in the conditional since "will" .

Niels invites the group to make additional edits to the Google document. 

 3. AOB 

Next meeting of the subgroup: Dec 22.

Action Items

  • ACTION (Subgroup): continue to work on this sentence on the mailing list and in Google doc. 
  • ACTION (subgroup): add some substance to the document related to other SO/ACs

Documents Presented

Chat Transcript

 Brenda Brewer:Good day all and welcome to Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #@16 on 13 December 2016 @ 19:00 UTC!

  Kavouss Arasteh:Dear Brenda,

  Kavouss Arasteh:Good day to you

  Brenda Brewer:Hello Kavouss!  I will call you in approximantly 15 minutes.

  Kavouss Arasteh:Good and tks

  Kavouss Arasteh:Dear All,

  Tatiana Tropina:Hi all

  Kavouss Arasteh:During the entire ICG,CWG,CCWG ,IOT,IRP ,,There has not been any chair so kind, balanced, patient, skillful and neutral as Niels.

  Kavouss Arasteh:I will tell that tomorrow 's meeting of CCWG

  Kavouss Arasteh:Congradulations Niels

  David McAuley (RySG):Brenda, I am 4154

  Tatiana Tropina:where is Niels actually? :-)

  Markus Kummer:Hi veryone and congrats to you all for a job well done!

  Brenda Brewer:Thank you, David!  

  Nathalie Vergnolle:Niels we can't hear you

  Nathalie Vergnolle:you are very very faint

  avri doria:very faintly

  David McAuley (RySG):did someone speak?

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):I don't hear Niels. Is he speaking?

  avri doria:yes Niels spoke starting the meeting.

  Tatiana Tropina:Someone typed

  avri doria:lots of typing.

  Tatiana Tropina:I didn't hear Niels

  Kavouss Arasteh:I HEAR NOTHING

  David McAuley (RySG):yes, hear the typing now and then

  Harold Arcos:idem Tatiana

  Nathalie Vergnolle:Now we hear you

  avri doria:yes

  David McAuley (RySG):yes

  Harold Arcos:Hi everyone,

  Robin Gross:Good morning from San Francisco!

  Harold Arcos:Good afternoon from sunny Caracas

  Tatiana Tropina:so two of my pal pen-holders are not here :( and Matt is not on the call either.

  Brenda Brewer:If your phone number ends with 3025, please identify for attendance purposes.  Thank you!

  Kavouss Arasteh:Niels, your co chair will also be absent?

  Niels ten Oever:

  Tatiana Tropina:Niels can you lead on this?

  Tatiana Tropina:since Greg is not here

  Kavouss Arasteh:May we do it one by one pls?

  Tatiana Tropina:I can jump when there are questions

  Leon Sanchez:hello everyone

  Tatiana Tropina:I am also still recovering.

  Leon Sanchez:my apologies for lateness

  Tatiana Tropina:I am ok with this change.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Kavouss is rather muffled - loud enough certainly but hard to understand.

  Leon Sanchez:indeed Anne

  Tatiana Tropina:That's also ok, we can replace

  Tatiana Tropina:I changed already

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):I am not clear on the change from "can" to "should".  Please clarify.  Could not understand Kavouss

  Tatiana Tropina:I agree with Kavouss

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):teamwork editing :--)

  Tatiana Tropina:we can put the first "should" under consideration, we can discuss how to word this

  Paul McGrady:+1, a preamble would help make it clear that this is NOT the framework.

  Tatiana Tropina:Then we need a preamble, yes.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Agree with David on the change in meaning that comes with change from "can" to "should".

  Tatiana Tropina:I am actually not ok with the world "prioritise" when can is changed to "should"

  Tatiana Tropina:though I don't like "can" either

  Tatiana Tropina:No.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):How about "may" ?  Or "It is recommended that ICANN prioritize.?

  Tatiana Tropina:I actually agree that "can" requires explanation.

  Leon Sanchez:I will have to leave the call

  Tatiana Tropina:but if we rephrase to suggestion and get rid of can this might work.

  Leon Sanchez:my apologies but something unexpected has happened

  Tatiana Tropina:Leon hope everything is well, take care

  Niels ten Oever:Take care Leon

  Leon Sanchez:everything ok, thanks everyone

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Technically Kavouss is right. "Can" is slang as used here.  "May" will work or better would be "it is recommended that"

  Tatiana Tropina:he haven't dropped it yet we have a suggestion to drop it :)

  Tatiana Tropina:Anne, yes, we can find a better way.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):"That ICANN prioritize" is correct because "prioritize" with no "s" is the subjunctive.

  Niels ten Oever:The document is indeed very new

  Niels ten Oever:and we have time

  Niels ten Oever:all suggestions are very welcome

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):that textbis fine from my POV,  and yes it is N early readingthis

  avri doria:confused: we are eliminating the word çan' becasue it indicates ability to do something and not permission to do so?

  Tatiana Tropina:David, will you be ok with rephrasing it with "suggestion from the group" way?

  avri doria:i meant 'can' ...

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Tatiana - I think David is saying he needs more time on this - as to the specific wording to replace "can".

  Niels ten Oever:The Subgroup on Human Rights of the CCWG suggests that while operationalizing the human rights bylaw, ICANN prioritizes areas of focus, such as its operations, internal procedures, and/or new policies consistent with its Mission. ICANN’s commitment to respect human rights and to take human rights into consideration in its operations and policies in the foregoing manner should be is consistent with the human rights provision of the bylaws. This could involve the use of a human rights impact assessment of how ICANN’s operations could impact human rights.

  Kavouss Arasteh:My second comment????

  Kavouss Arasteh:Tks

  Tatiana Tropina:Ah alright. I think the drafting team will benefit tremendously from David;s suggestion. Niels I suggest we include David in the drafting team emails exchange.

  Niels ten Oever:ICANN’s commitment to respect human rights and to take human rights into consideration in its operations and policies in the foregoing manner should be consistent with the human rights provision of the bylaws. This could involve the use of a human rights impact assessment of how ICANN’s operations could impact human rights.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@ Niels- it's still "prioritize" without an "s".  It's the subjunctive.

  avri doria:i.e. can is discriptive, not normative. as i said confused.

  Tatiana Tropina:it's British spelling.

  Tatiana Tropina:ah no, no

  Tatiana Tropina:got it wrong

  avri doria:'may prioritze'  ??

  Tatiana Tropina:Niels, shall inclusion David in the drafting team's email exchange be in actiton items? :-)

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):"May prioritize" is good.

  Tatiana Tropina:I am ok with "may prioritise"

  David McAuley (RySG):agree w/Niels that wordsmithing on call might be unwise at this time

  Tatiana Tropina:Yes, we won't move on like that. Let's stroke it and think of it later.

  Tatiana Tropina:*strike*

  David McAuley (RySG):some suggestions

  David McAuley (RySG):I am sure others will as well

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):yup we need to come back to this

  avri doria:looks like we have another mtg sheculded on the 20th

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):I am not certain about references to "substantive" or "not substantive". The normal distinction is between "Consensus Policy" (which triggers a Board 2/3 majority to reject and other policy which is not Consensus policy.  Consensus policy is what dictates what is in the Registry and Registrar contracts.  Can the drafting team comment on this?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):the other So sections need expansion obviously yes

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Another distinction that is made is "policy" or "implementation".  This can get very confusing in trying to resolve issues that arise during implementation of policy.  

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):SO

  David McAuley (RySG):agree w/Niels and GNSO policies should be treated as they usually are, should not imply change that process in this document.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Not sure there is any working definition at all for substantive versus non-substantive policy.

  Tatiana Tropina:This comment shall be definitely taken into account.

  Paul McGrady 2:I meant 1/7th.  Thanks!

  Tatiana Tropina:From Kavouss and Paul. And Anne. There is work to be done. Thanks for the comments.

  Kavouss Arasteh:DELETE "Substantive"and add afterGNSO, add, inconsultation with or in collaboration with other SIO/ac

  Mary Wong:@Anne, note that the reference to "substantive policies relating to gTLDs" is in the Bylaws (Article 11 on the GNSO).

  Tatiana Tropina:we have to think about ACs

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):indeed

  Tatiana Tropina:but the question is about policies and processes

  Tatiana Tropina:so we have to think of ACs

  Kavouss Arasteh:We are interpreting the Balaws and not reprating it

  David McAuley (RySG):I suggest that this document in no way imply a change to how GNSO policy is presently developed and approved in ICANN.

  Tatiana Tropina:Thanks a lot, Paul.

  Paul McGrady 2:+1 David.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):yes David it provides an 'articulation' though

  Tatiana Tropina:Greg on the call, yay.

  Kavouss Arasteh:Why yoy

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Actually all gTLD policy is developed at the GNSO - not just "substantive" policies.  Agree other SOs and ACs have input to that process and the GAC in parituclar has direct input to the Board.

  Tatiana Tropina:Because he lifted the doc heavily and can answer some questions.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO)::-)

  Kavouss Arasteh:Agree with consensus policy

  David McAuley (RySG):Agree w/Paul. This doc should not imply change to way GAC, e.g, develops advice nor how GNSO, e.g., develops policy.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):I would actually likely just delete "substantive".

  Harold Arcos:+1 Anne

  Paul McGrady 2:@Greg, glad the doctor said happy things!

  Paul McGrady 2:+! Greg - OK to just delete "substantive"

  Harold Arcos:"substantive" seems subjetive for me

  Niels ten Oever 2:substantive removed :)

  Mary Wong:@Greg, that is correct - the three SOs do not operate the same way on policy development.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):good

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Niels - Can you please repeat Kavouss?  very muffled.

  Paul McGrady 2:I had trouble hearing K.  Can you summarize?

  Mary Wong:The Bylaws spell out the scope of the GNSO and ccNSO policy processes very clearly, including who can participate in a ccNSO PDP, initiate one etc. The ASO's mechanisms are quite different from either the ccNSO or the GNSO as well.

  David McAuley (RySG):Good point Greg

  Tatiana Tropina:Yes, Greg

  Greg Shatan:"policies and frameworks"

  Mary Wong:The ASO policy process is spelled out in the MOU between ICANN and the NRO.

  Mary Wong:On frameworks, there is now the Framework of Principles for Future CCWGs (recently adopted by the ccNSO and GNSO).

  Harold Arcos:apologies, I have to drop off meeting

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):my next call is at top of hour I need to leave audio before that starts

  Greg Shatan:We're still peeling the onion, Niels....

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):"The different SOs whould consider incorporating HRIAs in THEIR PDPs, not "its".  After that sentence ,the references to "will" should be "would" in the conditional since "will" .

  Niels ten Oever 2:Thanks Anne, changed in the Google Doc !

  Niels ten Oever 2:changed into would

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):bye

  Niels ten Oever 2:Bye Cheryl!

  Greg Shatan:The sun will set on this call now.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Thanks all.

  Kavouss Arasteh:and will rise at the next meeting

  Paul McGrady 2:Thanks!!

  David McAuley (RySG):Thanks Niels and all, good bye

  Greg Shatan:Lou Gehrig retiring??

  Tatiana Tropina:thanks all! Bye

  Rudi Daniel:see u on 20 th this all

  Andreea Brambilla:Thank you!

  Javier Rua-Jovet:Bye

  Markus Kummer:bye

  • No labels