[Ws2-transparency] Materials for Tomorrow's WS2 Transparency Call

[Mike Rodenbaugh]

Thanks Michael.  I do understand the difficulty with scheduling
conveniently for us all, and that we need to rotate call times to share the
pain.  For me, it is more important to have robust written discussions on
the list, because more people are able to participate more thoughtfully
than on group conference calls.

Actually, I think it raises another transparency issue, that so much
"decision-making" is done on conference calls in ICANN working groups,
rather than via written communication.  Forcing people who want to
participate, to review call and chat transcripts, is incredibly inefficient
and thus practically impossible.  ICANN Staff has gotten much better at
summarizing WG calls in writing, but still in my recent experience I am
seeing far too much judging of "consensus" on important points, via very
limited indications of relatively few participants in conference calls.  I
don't know if that is part of this group's remit to address, but something
I have been thinking about so I throw it out there fwiw...  At least we can
decide how we want this group to operate.

Best,
Mike

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
http://rodenbaugh.com

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Michael Karanicolas <
michael at law-democracy.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks Mike - great to hear from you. Sorry about the timing - we are
> rotating the calls around, as per ICANN's guidelines. I can promise
> you, both Chris and myself and very much looking forward to the call
> following this one, which will be at 2 am and 3 am for us!
>
> We can certainly include the use of legal privilege in the discussion
> on exceptions - as that's undoubtedly an important one to dig into.
> More progressive jurisdictions have already significantly narrowed how
> this is interpreted for public bodies. And independent oversight will
> be an important part of the discussion under point 1.d.
>
> Best,
>
> Michael
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com>
> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I won't be making many if any calls at 13:00 UTC as that is 6a.m. for me.
> > But I have ample experience getting thwarted by ICANN's self-serving,
> > incredibly opaque DIDP; and so I intent to participate in those
> discussions
> > intensively.
> >
> > The thematic document poses good issues, to which I would add at least
> one
> > at the outset, which is to add "legal privilege" to the list of
> exceptions
> > always cited by ICANN.  At minimum, they should provide a privilege log
> (as
> > in US court practice, showing the date, the recipients and generally the
> > topic of any document claimed to be privileged) for such withheld
> > communications.  Also there should be a mechanism to challenge the
> assertion
> > of privilege or any other exception claimed by ICANN legal.  As of
> today, as
> > to all of the exceptions to disclosure, ICANN is the only arbiter of
> > applicability of the exceptions.  They ought not be the sole decider, as
> > accountability principles demand that an independent arbiter be allowed
> to
> > determine their applicability under circumstances where the assertion of
> any
> > privilege or exception is reasonably challenged.  That needs to get built
> > into the DIDP, in my humble opinion.
> >
> > I look forward to discussing these issues further.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
> >
> > Mike Rodenbaugh
> > RODENBAUGH LAW
> > tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
> > http://rodenbaugh.com
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Michael Karanicolas
> > <michael at law-democracy.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> In advance of our second call for the WS2 transparency subgroup, set for
> >> tomorrow at 1300 UTC, I am attaching a revised thematic outline. Thanks
> to
> >> everyone who contributed ideas, I think that we have succeeded in
> mapping
> >> out these issues very well, and look forward to discussing them
> tomorrow.
> >>
> >> Our planned agenda for the meeting is:
> >>
> >> 1. Welcome
> >> 2. Discussion re Thematic Overview Doc
> >> 3. Next Steps (e.g., further research)
> >> 4. AOB
> >>
> >> As further background, I am also attaching two reviews carried out by
> >> ICANN which are pertinent to these issues, and which were mentioned in
> the
> >> last call.
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> Michael Karanicolas
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ws2-transparency mailing list
> >> Ws2-transparency at icann.org
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-transparency
> >>
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-transparency/attachments/20160817/d7586ac7/attachment-0001.html>