[Wp4] Discrete issue: Which bylaws formulation

Mon Oct 12 21:11:24 UTC 2015

Dear All

>From the very beginning I was not in favour of reference to ANY DOCUMENT.

The Group should not single out one from many valid sources.

However, Under WSIS+10 multistakeholder Groups with 5 preparatory and one
Final

Meeting, it was agreed by consensus after hours and hours of  discussions
that at least two documents were referred to in the outcome of WSIS+10
which mentioned that

The right of freedom of expression, as described in Article 19 of the
UNIVERSAL Declaration of Human rights, and Article 19 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights….

There are other rights such as rights for free flow of information, rights
for education, and …..

Consequently the second document referred to above is also required to be
mentioned

Regards

Kavouss

2015-10-12 19:57 GMT+02:00 Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org>:

> Made some comments in the doc.  Meta level: the options for the CCWG
> should be only 3 or 4 - clearly proposed and reasoned.
>
> Right now the last part looks very complicated and confused.   Much of it
> should probably go to the supporting doc.
>
> Matthew
>
>
> On 12/10/2015 18:13, Dr. Tatiana Tropina wrote:
>
> Thanks Greg
> Well, when the deadline is approaching, so any edit can be a "final edit"
> :) (*Feci quod potui faciant meliora potentes*, in a way)
> I think the text already looked ok last time I checked it after the
> changes proposed by Niels a couple of days ago, however, I think there is a
> bit of confusion at the end about the bracketed language proposed for
> consideration. There are two options with "bracketed language" in the last
> part (I think we need to be crystal clear concerning what is actually
> forwarded to the larger group - I assume, it's a short version) + I think
> there should be a bit of more details about the poll/results. May be I am
> mistaken and can't remember exact wording, but I can't access the document
> in a "normal way" from my mobile phone - can't add the comments, etc. so in
> fact I can't correct anything.  I don't know what kind of edits you are
> going to make - if the issues I mentioned above won't be addressed, I can
> probably live with that...
> Again, thanks a lot.
> Best
> Tanya
>
> On 12/10/15 17:49, Greg Shatan wrote:
>
> I hesitate to call it a "final edit" but I can propose some edits this
> afternoon, after lunch (NY time), and others can see how that looks.
>
> Greg
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Dr. Tatiana Tropina <t.tropina at mpicc.de>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 to Greg
>>
>> By the way, the deadline is today, right? I can't edit the document
>> because I am on holiday; have very limited time & access to Internet. Is
>> there anyone who is going to make final edits?
>>
>> best,
>> Tatiana
>>
>> On 12/10/15 16:57, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>
>> I think that there has been broad opposition to "cherry-picking" human
>> rights.  I would apply this to the Ruggie principles as well.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.na> wrote:
>>
>>> Nigel overlooked the reference to my profession, when we say "Look at"
>>> it usually involves scalpels :-)-O
>>>
>>> So, how do the Ruggie principles look like without the subset?
>>>
>>> el
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2015-10-12 13:37, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>>> > Eberhard is misdirecting himself. We don't want to look at THAT subset.
>>> >
>>> > We should be looking at (in set theoretical terms) the relative
>>> > complement subset.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > N.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 12/10/15 12:27, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>>> >> Paul,
>>> >>
>>> >> I was not going to die in a ditch about the Ruggie principles, but why
>>> >> don't we look at your subset?
>>> >>
>>> >> el
>>> >>
>>> >> On 2015-10-11 23:03, Paul Twomey wrote:
>>> >>> Nigel
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I am of a similar view as Tatiana's below.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> My stated concern has always been with some subset sections of the
>>> >>> Ruggie principles.  Not necessarily with UDHR.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Paul
>>> >> [...]
>>> >>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
>>> el at lisse.NA            / *     |   Telephone: +264 81 124 6733
>>> <%2B264%2081%20124%206733> (cell)
>>> PO Box 8421             \     /
>>> Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wp4 mailing list
>>> Wp4 at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wp4 mailing listWp4 at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wp4 mailing list
>> Wp4 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wp4 mailing listWp4 at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>
>
> --
>
> Matthew Shears
> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
> Center for Democracy & Technology mshears at cdt.org+ 44 771 247 2987
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20151012/0a794191/attachment.html>