[ccwg-internet-governance] Form of contribution to NetMundial

Burr, Becky Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
Wed Feb 26 13:51:56 UTC 2014

I don’t think there is such a definition in any of the referenced docs.  I’m happy to draft a first cut.

J. Beckwith Burr
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
Office: + 1.202.533.2932  Mobile:  +1.202.352.6367  / becky.burr at neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz

From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 at 6:36 AM
To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com<mailto:ocl at gih.com>>
Cc: "ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>" <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Form of contribution to NetMundial

Olivier, I am tied up at the CSTD WG EC and limited in my ability to focus as much as want to.

Might I ask if there is a definition of Accountability and transparency that is in the ATRT language, or even in the AoC, or in the bylaws,that might be a starting point?

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 26, 2014, at 12:48 AM, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl at gih.com<mailto:ocl at gih.com>> wrote:

Dear Marilyn,

I note that your suggestions have garnered strong support from many.

May I suggest that a core part of this WG's contribution systematically refers to the "unique bottom-up, consensus based multistakeholder model of policy development?" with the widespread acceptance by stakeholders as you eloquently put it?

Also, let's have a definition about Transparency and Accountability, especially in the ICANN context. Volunteers needed to draft this paragraph, please!

Kindest regards,


On 25/02/2014 07:53, Marilyn Cade wrote:
I like a couple of phrases from you, Olivier.
I will look at the document, but I'd like to propose that we systematically reinforce that ICANN is a unique bottom up, consensus based multistakeholder model of policy development, and acceptance by stakeholders, with a global responsibility for coordinating a shared space of the unique indicators.

That is unique about ICANN, although I note that staff and the CEO are consistently
cutting the 'bottom up/consensus based ' off the MS language.

Secondly, transparency is being described as 'adequate'. I think that is not actually what
the community agreed to in ATRT and expects.

We must demand not just transparency, but accountability.  Transparency just means that sometime soon, documents are published. Or the CEO makes announcements.
Accountabiity means that ICANN takes consultation with its community, and that the Board ensures mechanisms which create inclusion of input from the affected Stakeholders who work within ICANN [by the way, it is a way to ensure more do come to ICANN to participate and work], and taken as an intertwined pair of commitments, it is what can contribute to ICANN's legitimacy with its own community, including the GAC members, and more broadly.

I would strongly urge that we incorporate the term of Transparency and Accountability.


> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:34:18 +0100
> From: ocl at gih.com<mailto:ocl at gih.com>
> To: DFares at 21cf.com<mailto:DFares at 21cf.com>; ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Form of contribution to NetMundial
> Dear David,
> in true bottom-up fashion, once you've volunteered for a section, please
> get in touch with other colleagues who have volunteered too for that
> same section & put something together between yourselves, then once
> you've reached consensus please post it to the CCWG mailing list.
> Would members of this WG prefer an open document Google Doc, so you can
> all work on it in your own time and simultaneously?
> I know that some are not used to use WIKIs, hence I thought Staff could
> eventually transcribe (cut/paste) things to the WIKI prior to a
> conference call.
> Kind regards,
> Olivier
> On 24/02/2014 17:18, Fares, David wrote:
> > Thanks for this Olivier and Patrick. Could someone please explain how the different working groups are supposed to finalize work on their definitions for review by the larger CCWG. I volunteered for 2 work groups but have not received any information on how to proceed. For example, I am on the Working Group to define Multi-Stakeholder and there is a definition in the draft proposed by Leon, should the entire Working Group comment on Leon's proposal? Thank you in advance for any clarification.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström
> > Sent: 24 February 2014 12:27
> > To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond; ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
> > Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Form of contribution to NetMundial
> >
> > I did some edit and added some text to the document. Keep or throw away :-)
> >
> > Patrik
> >
> > On 24/02/14 01:46, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
> >> Dear WG participants,
> >>
> >> please be so kind to find attached, the first draft of the
> >> contribution to NetMundial, as discussed on Friday's call.
> >> I have added a few paragraphs which we have already received.
> >> I have not yet added Filiz et al.'s draft for Critical Internet Resources.
> >>
> >> As discussed on the call, it looks like our contribution will need to
> >> be into two parts, filing each part with the correct NetMundial Thread:
> >>
> >> - Part 1: Internet Principles
> >> I suggest this includes:
> >> - our definitions
> >> - our arguments (technical, internet governance, ICANN)
> >>
> >> - Part 2: Future evolution of the Internet Governance ecosystem I
> >> suggest this includes:
> >> - our principles for the definition of ICANN's evolving future roadmap
> >>
> >> The draft attached is a working document. I realise many of you aren't
> >> used to working on a WIKI. I also realise that working almost entirely
> >> by email is likely to be quite inefficient.
> >> Should we create a Google Doc for this, so we can all add, annotate,
> >> comment?
> >>
> >> Please keep those contributions coming in.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Olivier
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> >> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
> >>
> > This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information. It is intended solely for the named addressee. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to the addressee), you may not copy or deliver this message or its attachments to anyone. Rather, you should permanently delete this message and its attachments and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. Any content of this message and its attachments that does not relate to the official business of Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc. or its subsidiaries must be taken not to have been sent or endorsed by any of them. No representation is made that this email or its attachments are without defect.
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20140226/133cff81/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list