[CCWG-ACCT] Report on Lawyers Call re Human Rights

Andrew Sullivan ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Thu Jan 21 23:11:39 UTC 2016


On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 03:02:12PM -0500, Avri Doria wrote:
> discussion of policy development.  At this point once the transition
> occurs, assuming it does at some point, people will be able to claim
> that as a private company human rights do not concern us. and therefore
> are out of scope in policy development.

I hadn't understood that angle before, so thanks for stating it.  But
I don't see how if follows.

It seems to me that the whole point of the tussle of policy
development is to consider a wide variety of considerations and input.
It seems to me that the source of that lies in the community, and
therefore it is the community, and not the corporation, that needs the
commitment to human rights.  Why isn't it better that the human rights
considerations be part of the constraint on some or all of the various
constituency groups, rather than part of the ICANN bylaws?  (In case
it's not clear, I don't intend that as a rhetorical question.)

Best regards,


Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list