Sub-group Members:   Anne Aikman-Scalese, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, David McAuley, Greg Shatan, Griffin Barnett, Janet Shih Hajek, Kavouss Arasteh,  Niels ten Oever, Robin Gross, Tatiana Tropina.

Observers/Guests:  Collin Kurre, Khaled Koubaa, Mark Carvell, Markus Kummer.

ICANN Org:  Nathalie Vergnolle, Yvette Guigneaux.   (Bonnie & Jamie – CART captioning)

Apologies:  Bastiaan Goslings, Matt Shears, Jorge Cancio, Seun Ojedeji. 

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




1. Administrivia - Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc

2. Second reading of e-mail to CCWG plenary

3. AOB 


  • Decision taken to proceed with submiting the revised report for CCWG-Plenary’s consideration.

Action Items:

  • NTO to submit the revised report for CCWG-Plenary’s consideration.


  • Members of the subgroup are seeking clarification on who has rights to file a Minority Statement, per the CCWG charter, and what has been done in the past:
    • Has an Observer filed a Minority Statement in CCWG Accountability before? 
    • Has anyone who wasn't an official Member  (appointed from an SOAC)  filed a Minority Statement in CCWG before?
    • What the CCWG Charter say about who has rights to file a Minority Statement?


Raw Caption Notes

Disclaimer:  This rough edit transcript, which may contain missing, misspelled or paraphrased words, is only provided for your immediate review and is not certified as verbatim and is not to be cited in any way. 

Chat Transcript

  Yvette Guigneaux: (8/28/2017 17:54) Hi All and welcome to the Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #32  | 29 Aug 2017 @ 19:00 UTC!

  Jamie-  CART support: (8/29/2017 11:39) Hello- can you make me a host for CART?

  Yvette Guigneaux: (11:49) hi Jamie - ok will do

  Bonnie-CART: (11:52) Hi, Yvette!  Can you please tell me who the Rapporteur will be for this meeting?

  Yvette Guigneaux: (11:52) Hi Bonnie - good day - rapporteur is Niels ten Oever

  Niels ten Oever: (11:52) Hi Bonnie, that will be me :)

  Bonnie-CART: (11:52) Thank you so much!

  Niels ten Oever: (11:52) Hello all

  Yvette Guigneaux: (11:52) hello there Niels

  Yvette Guigneaux: (11:54) Mr. Arasteh - are you good to go?

  Yvette Guigneaux: (11:54) you can see the room and hear ok?

  Khaled KOUBAA: (11:57) Hi everyone

  Tatiana Tropina: (11:59) Hi all

  Yvette Guigneaux: (12:00) hi all - please remember to  mute when not speaking

  Yvette Guigneaux: (12:01) will do

  Greg Shatan: (12:01) hello all.

  Greg Shatan: (12:02) Is it just me, or is the agenda sideways?

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:02) Mine is ok :)

  Greg Shatan: (12:02) iPad view....

  Greg Shatan: (12:03) I'm in the Matrix.  Maybe that's the issue.

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:03) Matrix has us, Greg.

  Yvette Guigneaux: (12:04) scrolling available if need be

  Robin Gross: (12:06) Has an Observer filed a Minority Statement in CCWG Accountability before? 

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): (12:08) I think that we cannot state that the view of Brazil is a "Minority View".  This is because of the Observer status.  I believe that the point at which Brazil should comment is at the plenary level.

  Robin Gross: (12:08) Rather, has anyone who wasn't an official Member  (appointed from an SOAC)  filed a Minority Statement in CCWG before?

  Nathalie Vergnolle: (12:09) @Robin: I don't have an answer, but I can bring it back to Bernie's attention.

  Robin Gross: (12:09) Thanks, Nathalie.

  Bonnie-CART: (12:10) Audio is cutting out for me

  Robin Gross: (12:11) What the CCWG Charter say about who has rights to file a Minority Statement?  We should look at the charter on this point.

  Yvette Guigneaux: (12:12) Bonnie - you ok? or is audio still cutting out for you?

  Greg Shatan: (12:12) Two wrongs don't make a right. Assuming there was a wrong.

  Bonnie-CART: (12:13) It's better, Greg was cutting out.

  David McAuley: (12:13) Beyond the process point, I respect the views of the three governments, think we have considered reference to Ruggie at lenghth and think there is no consensus in this group for making such a reference.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:13) agree David

  David McAuley: (12:13) BTW - I have no access to audio

  Niels ten Oever: (12:14) The minority statement was submitted by Jorge

  Niels ten Oever: (12:14) and then supported by Kavouss and Thiago

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): (12:15) Sorry - I thought Brazil had a separate Minority Statement.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:15) agree Niels

  Greg Shatan: (12:16) It should be noted that they are an Observer.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): (12:17) Agree with Greg.  It should be noted in the Minority Statement taht Brazil is an Observer.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:18) for the record here I am unconvinced that there hS neen any oversights in proper porcedures in this WT

  Robin Gross: (12:18) Often we listen to the recording and state any disagreement to the list in the following days.   many are  tracking these discussions without being on the call.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:18) exactly Robin

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:19) correct Greg

  Robin Gross: (12:20) And here I thought Non-Commercials Users were in the minority. ;-)

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:20) well said Greg..not just you

  Greg Shatan: (12:21) Everyone's in the minority sometimes.  The point is what one does at that time.

  Greg Shatan: (12:22) The drafting group sent its proposal to the full Subgroup, where it received the appropriate 2 readings.  I don't see the process issue.

  Greg Shatan: (12:23) Where are these numbers coming from?

  Greg Shatan: (12:23) It's the job of the Rapporteur to declare consensus levels.

  Robin Gross: (12:23) I agree, Greg.

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:24) Agree too

  Robin Gross: (12:24) Good point, Anne.

  Greg Shatan: (12:24) Is this a formal objection?

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): (12:25) This is polling - not a vote.

  Robin Gross: (12:25) An argument based on numbers should allow actual numbers.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:26) correct Niels

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:31) yes, I believe the text reflects the previous consensus

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:31) not the balance in terms of public comments

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:31) Ruggie principles are mentioned in the previous text

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:32) yup

  Niels ten Oever: (12:32) We haven't used the term 'consensus'

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:32) that might work Anne

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:32) at this levelmof work

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:33) balance was the key word In this

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): (12:33) Okay, thank you Niels and Cheryl

  Niels ten Oever: (12:34) The consensus was part of the work before the public comments

  Niels ten Oever: (12:35) in workstream 2

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:36) we have considered, quite properly IMO  in this WT 

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:37) the PCs

  Niels ten Oever: (12:37) "The group feels the current proposed wording is a minimum common denominator text between the different opinions held in the ICANN community.”

  David McAuley: (12:37) I agree with what Niels just said.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:38) correct Greg

  Robin Gross: (12:39) +1

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:39) +1000

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:39) yes +++++

  Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): (12:40) Teh fundamental issue here is that we cannot, in our work, change the ICANN ByLaw or the definition of "applicable law."  Tht is why the public comments were considered fully but cannot be fully accommodated as requested by the government participants.  I think there is frustration that the results of Workstream 1 work are what they are.

  Greg Shatan: (12:41) Niels said he was closing the queue after you, Kavouss.

  David McAuley: (12:41) +1 @ Greg, I believe the three government statemets have been taken into account. I see them as principled statements aboiut Ruggie but I also see a risk with Ruggie that could easily pull ICANN away from its limited mission.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:41) indeed Anne

  Greg Shatan: (12:41) There was a consensus not to take them into account.

  Greg Shatan: (12:42) This has nothing to do with WS1....

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:42) again  In agree @David

  Greg Shatan: (12:42) But the group did decide not to change the report, after taking the Comments into account.

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:43) Yes. The comments were taken into account. The groupd decided to change the fottnote but not the text.

  Greg Shatan: (12:43) I disagree with my esteemed colleague's restatement of the process and its outcome.

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:44) I disagree too but it sems there is no way to really reach agreement on this

  David McAuley: (12:44) None here Niels

  Greg Shatan: (12:44) We have to make decisions somehow.  What is your decision-making method, Kavouss?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:44) Kavouss  pleasecrespectvthe Chair of the meeting

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:45) he can use whatevervtools he wishes

  Greg Shatan: (12:45) I have no problem with the text as currently stated.

  Greg Shatan: (12:45) I don

  David McAuley: (12:45) Nor do I

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:45) I have no problem with the text.

  Greg Shatan: (12:45) I don't see a vote.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:45) I have NO problem with the text

  Greg Shatan: (12:46) We are talking about the text of the COVER EMAIL now....

  Robin Gross: (12:46) I dont remember anyone being against voting when GAC stacked the deck on the vote to get into the empowered community.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:46) correct Greg the cover letter on screen

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:48) close the work is indeed a possibility

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:48) not a preffered one of course

  Greg Shatan: (12:49) I agree with you Niels.  And with a quorum, the decision is properly taken.

  Greg Shatan: (12:49) Thank you for admitting that.

  Robin Gross: (12:49) It is a proper decision.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:49) it is called establishment of the meetings views Kavouss

  Greg Shatan: (12:50) What is your decision making method, Kavouss?  Decisions must be made or this is nothing but a talk shop.

  Greg Shatan: (12:51) The silent ones have not objected to the conclusion, so I think it is proper to consider them as the "silent majority."

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:51)  that IS voting Kavouss which you object to

  Greg Shatan: (12:51) Abstention has to be a decided and stated position.

  Greg Shatan: (12:52) Good point Cheryl, that is voting.  The logic of this fails me.

  Greg Shatan: (12:52) Silence is not abstention.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:52) THANK YOU  emphasis  intended Niels

  Tatiana Tropina: (12:52) Thanks Niels and all - see you tomorrow at the plenary

  David McAuley: (12:52) Thanks Niels, thanks all, good bye

  Robin Gross: (12:52) Niels, please include my approval.  I stepped out and missed the time to tick green.

  Greg Shatan: (12:52) Thank you Niels!! Count me as a green tick too.....

  Greg Shatan: (12:53) Bye all.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (12:53) bye

  Bonnie-CART: (12:53) Thank you!


  • No labels