<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.E-MailFormatvorlage17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 2.0cm 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="DE-CH" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Good question. A comparison table (text of AoC and way it is being introduced into the Bylaws) would be helpful for those
(like me) who do not know by heart the AoC…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Jorge
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="DE" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Von:</span></b><span lang="DE" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org]
<b>Im Auftrag von </b>Alan Greenberg<br>
<b>Gesendet:</b> Donnerstag, 14. Januar 2016 06:50<br>
<b>An:</b> Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>; avri@acm.org; accountability-cross-community@icann.org<br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] "Christmas trees" and "Consumer Trust" in Article 1 of the Bylaws<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Becky, can you please explain why you think that 3.c is there solely as an introduction to 9.3, whereas 3.a, 3.b and 3.d clearly have a wider scope?<br>
<br>
For those who do not have an AoC handy, I reproduce the section in question here.<br>
<br>
<i>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.
<br>
<br>
</i>Alan<br>
<br>
At 13/01/2016 02:01 PM, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Come on Avri - I could say that we don¡¯t have sufficient cause - let alone<br>
authority - to amend the AoC, but I don¡¯t think that moves the ball<br>
forward. Rather, and respecting the integrity and good intentions of<br>
people on various sides of this argument, we have a strong disagreement<br>
about the meaning of the AoC on the consumer trust issue.<br>
<br>
One group reads Paragraph 3 as a ¡°chapeau¡± text introducing Paragraph 9.3,<br>
in which the consumer trust issue is exclusively limited to TLD expansion<br>
and calls for a review on the subject. I, along with many others, acting<br>
in good faith believe that this is unquestionably the proper reading of<br>
the AoC. <br>
<br>
I understand that another group reads Paragraph 3 as creating a separate,<br>
stand-alone and generalized obligation to promote consumer trust in the<br>
DNS marketplace that should be reflected in Article 1 of the Bylaws.<br>
<br>
I accept that this reading is taken in good faith, but I believe it is<br>
inconsistent with standard principles applicable to textual<br>
interpretation, let alone statutory construction, and an extraordinary<br>
expansion of ICANN¡¯s remit. I know what protecting and promoting<br>
¡°consumer trust¡± means to a consumer protection regulator with sovereign<br>
authority. I don¡¯t think that¡¯s ICANN¡¯s job - although I do agree that<br>
the AoC gives ICANN specific obligations in this regard in connection with<br>
TLD expansion. That is being transposed into the Bylaws.<br>
<br>
But if we cannot reach consensus about charging ICANN with a general<br>
obligation with to promote consumer trust in the DNS marketplace - which<br>
apparently we cannot - then we need to find a way to proceed, unless<br>
everyone just wants to keep repeating their views and casting aspersions<br>
about the good faith of people with different views. So, my suggestion is<br>
WS2. <br>
<br>
<br>
J. Beckwith Burr <br>
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy<br>
General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br>
Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<br>
<<a href="http://www.neustar.biz/"> http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 1/13/16, 12:12 PM, "Avri Doria" <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>Hi,<br>
><br>
>In this case, I do not believe we will have sufficient cause to request<br>
>that the AOC be cancelled by mutual agreement. If all of the AOC<br>
>concerns can't be brought into the bylaws, then they can't be said to be<br>
>covered by the the By Laws.<br>
><br>
>Of course ICANN can still unilaterally abandon the AOC.<br>
><br>
>I also think we may need to be much more careful to make sure we have<br>
>agreed upon definitions for all terms in the By Laws and not just those<br>
>that belong to concepts some people are not comfortable with. I know<br>
>there are some terms for which I have not been absolutely sure of the<br>
>meaning and on which we have never had real dialogue. For example in an<br>
>international context what do we really mean by 'promote',<br>
>'competition', and 'consumer choice'. I know I am not comfortable with<br>
>the way some people define these terms. What are our criteria for these<br>
>terms and for knowing when we have achieved them? How can a review<br>
>decide that we have adequate global competition? How active do we need<br>
>to be about promoting competition, especially in a global context with<br>
>economies that have different capabilities. How much choice is<br>
>sufficient consumer choice? I do not believe we have any better idea,<br>
>or have had adequate dialogue and consensus on the meaning of these<br>
>terms and concepts. I do believe we generally understand them as well<br>
>as we understand consumer trust, but not better.<br>
><br>
>I am also sure I can find lack of dialogue and ambiguity on many other<br>
>terms used in the By Laws. Is that the process we must now open up?<br>
><br>
>Lastly I think it is in the process of the multistakeholder AOC type<br>
>reviews that we work on our evolving consensus definitions. I am<br>
>certain that we now have a much deeper understanding of Accountability<br>
>and Transparency after the two ATRT reviews than we did before those<br>
>reviews.<br>
><br>
>avri<br>
><br>
>On 13-Jan-16 10:59, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
>> I understand your point Avri, but (as I said, unlike the HR issue) we<br>
>>have<br>
>> had no real dialogue on what ©øconsumer trust©÷ encompasses (outside of<br>
>>the<br>
>> new gTLD review context), so it seems to me that moving the issue to WS2<br>
>> is the only possible approach.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> J. Beckwith Burr<br>
>> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy<br>
>> General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
>> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br>
>> Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<br>
>> <<a href="http://www.neustar.biz/"> http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 1/12/16, 5:42 PM, "Avri Doria" <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> Hi,<br>
>>><br>
>>> Not sure I buy into the Xmas tree analogy, especially when trying to<br>
>>> delineate values.<br>
>>><br>
>>> And while I have not had to make this argument in a while, I still<br>
>>> maintain that as a vassal of the NTIA, ICANN would have been<br>
>>>constrained<br>
>>> to respect human rights and that the loss of NTIA forces us to take<br>
>>>some<br>
>>> responsibility for that as a corporation, especially in regard to an<br>
>>> open Internet. <br>
>>><br>
>>> I still find it rather shocking and depressing that many, including our<br>
>>> Board are fighting against human rights so hard at iCANN. Option 2b<br>
>>> would be a travesty and 2c is just a fig leaf, better than nothing, but<br>
>>> barely.<br>
>>><br>
>>> As for consumer trust, that may be a similar situation. NTIA has shown<br>
>>> by its participation in the AOC how much it cares about consumer trust,<br>
>>> and I think that if the complaints against ICANN for consumer issues<br>
>>>got<br>
>>> any worse than they are, we would hear about from the NTIA and it<br>
>>>would<br>
>>> be a consideration for any IANA renewal. I would hope that they would<br>
>>> reject any plan that did not promise an effort to maintain and improve<br>
>>> ours.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> avri<br>
>>><br>
>>> On 12-Jan-16 16:30, Andrew Sullivan wrote:<br>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 07:08:20PM +0000, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>>> The language on human rights would be a departure from that<br>
>>>>> standard, and the introduction of a generalized ©øconsumer trust©÷ role<br>
>>>>> would be yet another. Apart from these two concepts, all of the<br>
>>>>> assigned roles and responsibilities appear in ICANN©ös existing<br>
>>>>> Bylaws, Articles of Incorporation, and the White Paper itself.<br>
>>>> I think the above is an important argument, and it takes on more<br>
>>>> importance when we reflect on previous observations from the NTIA that<br>
>>>> this accountability work ought not to be an opportunity to remake<br>
>>>> ICANN.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Best regards,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> A<br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> ---<br>
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
>>> <br>
>>><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antiv"> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antiv</a>
<br>
>>>ir<br>
>>> <br>
>>>us&d=CwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahO<br>
>>>P8<br>
>>> <br>
>>>WDDkMr4k&m=mPCiA33T_ipM9xYTRwc9mx-BySpmmwfZsdwlQRjVXhM&s=90feHGO6z1UakNU<br>
>>>Km<br>
>>> 1puqej2hiSN0i1qKEBXIp7F1sY&e=<br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
>>> <br>
>>><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma"> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma</a>
<br>
>>>n_<br>
>>> <br>
>>>listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<br>
>>>lU<br>
>>> <br>
>>>Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=mPCiA33T_ipM9xYTRwc9<br>
>>>mx<br>
>>> -BySpmmwfZsdwlQRjVXhM&s=r-pEdrcIahOTlTQ9i-oail-6pa2AEY55jJwnzefh8U8&e=<br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
>> <br>
>><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman"> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman</a>
<br>
>>_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<br>
>>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=PF_NdosT4JCr5C4OVB8<br>
>>QdQB7quVw9enLpLj_xII31sI&s=eMSU5H8PvaY5Mf0Gi1SEuiQhpT01vxOvZGJgpclgqyE&e=<br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
>---<br>
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antivir"> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antivir</a>
<br>
>us&d=CwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8<br>
>WDDkMr4k&m=PF_NdosT4JCr5C4OVB8QdQB7quVw9enLpLj_xII31sI&s=6CL2_4RFJr5TCJVan<br>
>JlKVPZ87BU4rKMhz9XZ7Hdz-XA&e=<br>
><br>
>_______________________________________________<br>
>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman"> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman</a> _<br>
>listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lU<br>
>Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=PF_NdosT4JCr5C4OVB8QdQ<br>
>B7quVw9enLpLj_xII31sI&s=eMSU5H8PvaY5Mf0Gi1SEuiQhpT01vxOvZGJgpclgqyE&e= <br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>