[CCWG-ACCT] Human Rights

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

Why would that be, is Iranian law on human rights very complex?

el

-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini 4

> On 3 Mar 2016, at 21:20, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> Thanks to all of you.
> I am not in favour to define nor interpret " Applicable Law"
> We would be opening a very complex discussion and almost inconclusive results
> Kavouss  
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 3 Mar 2016, at 20:12, Martin Boyle <Martin.Boyle at nominet.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> Nigel, you seem to be advocating US interpretation of human rights, which in turn would imply a degree of extraterritoriality.
>> 
>> That should not be the case for ccTLDs as Eberhard points out, but it might be a big issue for geo-TLDs, too.
>> 
>> I think that "applicable law" is the best formulation for where we are and WS2 can have the joy of interpreting what are the implications of that.  Let's leave such a difficult discussion to then.
>> 
>> Martin 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Martin Boyle
>> Senior Policy Advisor
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> nominet.uk    DD: +44 (0)1865 332251
>> Minerva House, Edmund Halley Road, Oxford, OX4 4DQ, United Kingdom
>> 
>> 
>> On 2 Mar 2016, at 13:58, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.na> wrote:
>> 
>>> And,
>>> 
>>> it does so for gTLDs only.
>>> 
>>> el
>>> 
>>>> On 2016-03-02 15:42 , Nigel Roberts wrote:
>>>> As you rightly say, I am foreshadowing WS2.
>>>> 
>>>> But I am also renewing my strong objection to the "applicable law"
>>>> formulation, for the following reason.
>>>> 
>>>> It's quite valid to comment, in response, that ICANN *already* regulates
>>>> the takedown of domain names in the protection of third-party rights -
>>>> the protection of intellectual property.
>>>> 
>>>> That is all well and good, and is a worthy step in the protection of
>>>> that person/organisations rights under (for example) Art. 1, Prot.1 of
>>>> the ECHR -- provided it is balanced against the rights to free
>>>> expression and due process.
>>>> 
>>>> But it's not hard to see that the "applicable law" scenarion could be
>>>> misused to impose controls on content.
>>>> 
>>>> For example, the right to privacy and the right to free expression
>>>> intersect in different places in different countries.
>>>> 
>>>> This is the well-known "margin of appreciation" in Human Rights
>>>> jurisprudence.
>>>> 
>>>> So, ICANN, by binding itself to 'applicable law' would potentially bind
>>>> itself to breaching the First Amendment, by having a by-law obligation
>>>> to 'applicable law' in say the UK (libel), France (celebrity) or China
>>>> (respect for authority).
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 02/03/16 13:20, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
>>>>> Hi Nigel,
>>>>> 
>>>>> This will be an interesting discussion on our WS2 work plan.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I fail to see why or how ICANN would be obliged to develop such
>>>>> policies as ICANN is not an entity with (legal) powers to take down
>>>>> any kind of content. The only situation in which I see ICANN taking
>>>>> down a site, as opposed to a particular content within a website, is
>>>>> in case a Court ordered such take down which, in my mind at least,
>>>>> would be subject to different applicable norms in the context of
>>>>> international cooperation I think, and for that Court order to be
>>>>> escalated to ICANN level I would think it would need to be taken
>>>>> through the path of registrant-registrar-registry before even getting
>>>>> to ICANN but that is just an assumption, of course.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> León
>>>>> 
>>>>>> El 29/02/2016, a las 8:26 p.m., Nigel Roberts
>>>>>> <nigel at channelisles.net> escribió:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-35685999
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This tells me that the right to free expression is one which ICANN
>>>>>> should respect, and not merely 'as required by applicable law'.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It seems to me that 'applicable law' here would have ICANN institute
>>>>>> policies allowing for takedown of the material that is contained in
>>>>>> the books referred to in this article, would it not?
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160304/23381970/attachment-0001.html>