[Ws2-hr] When should ICANN uphold human rights?

[Arasteh]

Paul
Yes , the questions to be submitted to Human Rights Group could be around what you described
Tks
Kavouss   

Sent from my iPhone

> On 4 Sep 2016, at 19:24, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear Farzaneh
>  
> Of course your questions are meaningful.  Indeed, the ONLY two meaningful questions in this discussion are a) what substance we see in the phrase human rights? And b) When, if ever, ICANN should give that substance (whatever it may be) effect?
>  
> Your questions clearly go to the later of these two issues.  Members of the group may disagree on the answers we reach, but you’re asking questions that have real meaning – whatever anyone may say to the contrary.
>  
> Paul
>  
> Paul Rosenzweig
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
> www.redbranchconsulting.com
> My PGP Key: http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/
>  
> From: ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of farzaneh badii
> Sent: Sunday, September 4, 2016 11:56 AM
> To: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
> Cc: ws2-hr at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] When should ICANN uphold human rights?
>  
> Calling something "not meaningful" is very easy. But it does not devalue its merits, fortunately.  Please provide a rationale for why the questions are not meaningful. I don't have to consult with the co-chairs to discuss the questions here. If the group feels that it is unnecessary to discuss these questions they can simply not respond, if they feel we should re-formulate them, then we can. 
>  
> The questions are to clarify what we mean by ICANN should not become a content regulator. The discussions that can arise responding to the question and sub-questions which I have posted can lead us towards a more tangible understanding of what we mean when we say ICANN should not become a content regulator and should not go out of its scope and mission when upholding human rights. 
>  
> Best
>  
> Farzaneh 
>  
> On 4 September 2016 at 17:34, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
> I do not understand the meaning and purpose of these questions.
> Perhaps the author of the questions could consult other two co chairs and come up with meaningfull text.
> We can not send out these questions at all
> Reagrds
> Kavouss
>  
> 2016-09-04 14:25 GMT+02:00 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>:
> Hi all, 
>  
> Sorry for sending out the questions late. I wanted to provide a gist of what we discussed during our call and then provide the questions but unfortunately, we still do not have the recording. Below are some questions for the group to discuss:
>  
>  
> Considering ICANN's scope and mission, when should ICANN uphold human rights?
>  
> - In its consideration to enter into contracts with registries and registrars? (for example, when they are considering a new gTLD application) 
>  
> - During the contractual relationship with the registries and the registrars by obligating the registries and registrars to enforce human rights?
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Best 
>  
>  
> --
> Farzaneh
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-hr mailing list
> Ws2-hr at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> --
> Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20160904/86276309/attachment-0001.html>