[CCWG-ACCT] Human Rights draft text for third reading

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Jordan
Thank you very much for the message
In regard with your first point
Quote
*"will not enter into force" does indeed render the clause ineffective
until the FoI it mentions is developed. I understand from you (offline)
that this is the case, but others might wonder the same thing."*
*Unquote*
Yes it will
In fact the term" *will not enter into force" *is more appropriate from
legal point of view than the term *"will be ineffective"*
*...*
*In regard with your second point *
*Quote*
" *wherever we land on this question, I just want to signal my own view as
a "Member" of the CCWG that I am relaxed about whether this is WS1 or 2 -
my own personal view is that the important thing is that the approach to
interpreting and applying human rights in the ICANN context is developed by
the ICANN community before bylaws-type obligations or requirements come
into effect."*
Unquote
It may be the case that some or many CCWG members are relaxed but other are
not that is why several others prepfer to push it to WS2.
Regards
Kavouss

2016-01-25 22:43 GMT+01:00 Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz>:

> Thank you Leon. This is one of the issues I have not followed in huge
> depth, and I acknowledge the expertise and energy deployed through WP4 as
> well as all the other comments that have come in on this.
>
> I would like to offer two thoughts.
>
> First, this proposed approach is fine with me so long as our lawyers can
> certify that "will not enter into force" does indeed render the clause
> ineffective until the FoI it mentions is developed. I understand from you
> (offline) that this is the case, but others might wonder the same thing.
>
> Second, wherever we land on this question, I just want to signal my own
> view as a "Member" of the CCWG that I am relaxed about whether this is WS1
> or 2 - my own personal view is that the important thing is that the
> approach to interpreting and applying human rights in the ICANN context is
> developed by the ICANN community before bylaws-type obligations or
> requirements come into effect.
>
> This text seems to deliver that. So would pushing the matter off to WS2.
> I'll happily stand with consensus either way.
>
> cheers
> Jordan
>
>
> On 26 January 2016 at 09:40, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <
> leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> In anticipation for our call tomorrow I am sending you the proposed
>> language for the Human Rights bylaw. This text tries to address all the
>> concerns that were raised in our recent calls and on the mailing list.
>>
>> Please take a momento to review the proposed text and provide your
>> feedback at your earliest convenience.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> León
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jordan Carter
>
> Chief Executive
> *InternetNZ*
>
> +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
> Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz
> Skype: jordancarter
> Web: www.internetnz.nz
>
> *A better world through a better Internet *
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160126/7718f74b/attachment.html>