[Wp4] Fwd: Re: [] Variety of formulation for Human Rights bylaw that were made. - corrected

Sat Aug 8 12:15:06 UTC 2015

This bounced, so again,

el

-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

> On Aug 8, 2015, at 11:54, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.na> wrote:
> 
> There is nothing sensitive here.
> 
> Human Rights are Human Rights, whether some nation states accept it or not.
> 
> And, they are absolute, not subject to conditions. 
> 
> el
> 
> -- 
> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
> 
>> On Aug 8, 2015, at 10:58, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear All
>> I understand your strong position in regard with such an important, fundamental and delicate subject.
>> I am involved since  almost 12 years  in various fora , UN. Multilateral ,NGO dealing with such a sensitive issue.
>> As some of us has already indicated once we open the discussions on RIGHTS , immediately the issue of OBLIGATIONS appears whether in form if social, individual, ethical and.,,,.
>> Moreover, some of you intended to puck up from one or several resolutions adopted at some if these fora or elsewhere on a selective basis and other selective idea from other sources put them together to satisfy your views.
>> But these resolutions or compilations are reflecting various element   to balance  the consolidated text in order that everybody feels happy as his or her views are found in that overall   Outcome.
>> But if you select one or two elements in isolation from the balancing elements in a selective manner then you would get into serious difficulties as you have broken the consensus prevailed when such materials were globally consented             
>> Once again we do not need to enter into derails but just a very high level reference to UNDOHR snd International
>>  Covenant on Political.,...  
>> Regards
>> Kavouss
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 7 Aug 2015, at 18:39, McAuley, David <dmcauley at verisign.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Greg,
>>>  
>>> Thank you for all the thought you are putting into this effort – consistent with the generous amount of time/commitment you have put into our CCWG work generally.
>>>  
>>> I have two comments to this suggested approach.
>>>  
>>> First, I come down on the side of others on the list who have said that this level of detail in WS1 may be over-complicating things. As I see it, our job in WS1 is to try to come up with the statement that eluded us prior to issuing Draft Proposal Two on Aug. 3 – a statement about ICANN’s commitment toward the respect of fundamental human rights within its mission. We were very close.
>>>  
>>> The greater detail should be left for WS2. In fact, it might be possible to address this issue by adding a new sentence to follow either of the examples we posted at paragraph 151 of the proposal, perhaps something like this: “The CCWG will develop a more complete statement of this commitment in Work Stream Two.”
>>>  
>>> Secondly (and IMO with respect to WS2), where you say below: “understanding how these rights interact with ICANN's existing obligations under US federal, state and local laws …” I would suggest “understanding how these rights interact with ICANN’s existing obligations under applicable laws …”.
>>>  
>>> David McAuley
>>>  
>>> From: wp4-bounces at icann.org [mailto:wp4-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 5:35 PM
>>> To: wp4 at icann.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Wp4] Fwd: Re: [] Variety of formulation for Human Rights bylaw that were made. - corrected
>>>  
>>> In terms of next steps, here is a list I put in an email about a week ago, slightly adapted for the current context.
>>> study/analysis/discussion of the underlying documents (treaties, conventions, guidelines, standards, etc.) (which in turn requires determining which documents are relevant -- there have been several helpful suggestions but that can't automatically be taken as exhaustive or on-target),
>>> understanding the rights put forth in these documents
>>> (
>>> and
>>> any other rights 
>>> put forth
>>> as human rights in the WG)
>>> ,
>>> understanding whether all rights under discussion are in fact "human rights",
>>> understanding how these rights may interact and be balanced amongst themselves,
>>>  
>>> understanding how these rights relate to and interact with ICANN's mission and activities, 
>>> understanding how these rights interact
>>>  with other rights and obligations in play at ICANN (including the range of possible outcomes of such interactions and how these interactions would take place and be resolved in the ICANN framework),
>>> understanding how these rights interact with ICANN's existing obligations under US federal, state and local laws and regulations (some of which embody, in differing fashions and degrees, relevant international treaties and conventions)
>>> 
>>> how this relates (if at all) to ICANN's Corporate Social Responsibility and what efforts have been made or need to be made in that regard
>>> ,
>>> find out 
>>> how other organizations similar to ICANN
>>>  (e.g., I* organizations)
>>> have dealt with these issues,
>>> determining
>>> which Bylaws
>>>  amendment is the most appropriate outcome relating to this issue (and noting that various proposals have been floated in recent weeks),
>>> understanding the interaction between such an amendment and other
>>> B
>>> ylaws and the Articles of Incorporation, and other normative and operative ICANN documents,
>>> 
>>> determining what efforts may need to take place
>>>  and what groups may need to be formed
>>>  as a result of 
>>> a Bylaw 
>>> amendment (including without limitation PDP (or non-PDP) GNSO Working Groups or Cross-Community Working Groups
>>> )
>>> ,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> understanding and integrating with other efforts taking place in and around ICANN (GAC WG, "Working Party"),
>>> what an "impact analysis" would entail (who, when, how, what criteria, what deliverable, what scope, what triggers, etc.), 
>>> whether there are other "impact analyses" that should also be put in place at this time or which are already in place, 
>>> what the result, effects and consequences (intentional and unintentional) of various impact analysis outcomes would be (either on present policy and implementation, on future policy and implementation and on other ICANN activities).
>>> I think the last 4 points can be left to WS2. For the rest, we'll need to balance work in WS1 vs. WS2, but I think each requires some work in WS1 to have a framework of understanding the meaning and consequences of a Bylaws amendment, and to determine the best way forward in WS1.  A number of these could (and probably should) generate (or be recast as) "Stress Tests."
>>>  
>>> This is very much a first draft (or 1.1, since I did revisit it once), so further contributions and revisions are welcomed.  
>>>  
>>> Greg
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Nope.  Nothing hidden and nefarious here.  I'll leave that to this guy: Greg Satan Twitter Page
>>>  
>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.na> wrote:
>>> Avri,
>>>  
>>> same tactics as usual.
>>>  
>>> Not unexpected.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> el
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
>>> 
>>> On Aug 6, 2015, at 20:44, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Avri,
>>>  
>>> You are certainly entitled to express yourself, and I look forward to a robust and productive discussion.  Again, there is no intention to obfuscate.  The intention is to clarify, which I believe will build a stronger consensus.
>>>  
>>> Greg
>>>  
>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Freedom of expression allows me to object to the statements you make.
>>> I asked nicely, with a please even.  I did not attempt to regulate you
>>> speech.
>>> 
>>> I am objecting to what I perceive to be tactics to obfuscate and make
>>> things seem hidden and nefarious.
>>> That too is freedom of expression.
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 06-Aug-15 15:34, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>> > I really don't think using a 500 year old colloquialism "cheapens the
>>> > discussion."  I also find it ironic to find this admonition in a
>>> > discussion about, inter alia, freedom of expression.  Political
>>> > correctness, trigger words, and other such stuff are a not
>>> > inconsequential threat to freedom of expression and freedom of ideas
>>> > -- starting with a kernel of good intentions, and then becoming quite
>>> > damaging....
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>>> > <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     On 06-Aug-15 14:28, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>> >     > Otherwise, we are just buying a pig in a poke.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     I really have trouble with such a reference to human rights.
>>> >     Please do
>>> >     not cheapen this discussion.
>>> >
>>> >     avri
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     ---
>>> >     This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> >     https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>> >
>>> >     _______________________________________________
>>> >     Wp4 mailing list
>>> >     Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>> >     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Wp4 mailing list
>>> > Wp4 at icann.org
>>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wp4 mailing list
>>> Wp4 at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wp4 mailing list
>>> Wp4 at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wp4 mailing list
>>> Wp4 at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wp4 mailing list
>>> Wp4 at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wp4 mailing list
>> Wp4 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp4/attachments/20150808/6503e14c/attachment-0001.html>