[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCSG collaboration with ALAC

Wed Oct 3 10:00:50 EEST 2018

At the risk of mentioning again smth that has already been said here (and
taking the discussion a few steps back), we still have the joint outreach
with ALAC - in Panama it was an NCSG&At-Large outreach - but in BCN it went
back to being NCUC & At-Large. So the dialogue space is still there and
maybe its time to use this space to build up on the relationship and even
evolve the outreach idea back to a joint meeting in the next editions.

Best,
bruna

Em qua, 3 de out de 2018 às 11:46, Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> escreveu:

> I think we have to keep trying.  We recognize that ALAC has always
> represented commercial and IP interests....after all Leon, their Board
> person, is an IP lawyer, just as one example.  They have many members who
> represent cybersecurity companies.  They have tons of ISOC folks who
> represent businesses.  So we just need to keep mentioning our concerns, and
> we will surface those who also care about the end user who is entitled to
> rights protection.
>
> Stephanie Perrin
>
>
> On 2018-10-03 09:42, Collin Kurre wrote:
>
> Given the tagline “We Serve the Users”, I too have been surprised and
> confused by ALAC positions at times, perceiving them to be *against *the
> interests of large portions (if not the majority) of internet users.
>
> For that reason, I agree that a face-to-face meeting would be preferable
> to clear the air, identify joint interests, and lay the groundwork for
> further cooperation and, ideally, joint action on behalf of end-users.
>
> --
> Collin Kurre
> ARTICLE 19
>
> On Oct 3, 2018, at 10:07 AM, AMADU YUSIF <yamadu at UG.EDU.GH
> <yamadu at ug.edu.gh>> wrote:
>
> Arm, based on what your saying and your experience, I think its a right
> time to have a face-t-face meeting with ALAC to be able to trash out with
> the consistently conflicted issues. We all have agenda to protect
> internet.
>
> Yusif Amadu
> eLearning Unit
> University of Ghana Computing Systems
> University of Ghana
> Cell: +233244659245
> Skype:  kooissi
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>> on behalf of Amr Elsadr <
> aelsadr at ICANNPOLICY.NINJA <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>>
> *Sent:* 02 October 2018 16:41:12
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCSG collaboration with ALAC
>
> Hi,
>
> At the risk of being wrong, I’ll go ahead and assume that scheduling
> issues are likely why these joint meetings have stopped. ICANN meetings
> have been a scheduling nightmare for a few years now.
>
> I wasn’t involved in the JAS WG, but I first joined NCSG in 2010, and have
> been pretty involved in GNSO/gTLD policy development since 2012. I don’t
> think I can recollect a single time I have been able to collaborate with
> ALAC on their policy positions. In my experience, their desired policy
> outcomes have consistently conflicted with our own. They almost exclusively
> seem to favor IP rights and policies that favor LEAs over the interests of
> non-commercial name holders.
>
> One area I have found it helpful to work with them is on process issues,
> so non-PDP GNSO WGs, like the GNSO Policy and Implementation WG. But
> certainly not policy-oriented WGs.
>
> If there is a reason to meet with them, and collaborate, perhaps this can
> be done over a conference call(s)? I don’t believe we need to slice out a
> slot of ICANN meetings to hang out, but that’s just me. I also wouldn’t
> begrudge others for meeting with them to try to identify common grounds.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> On Oct 2, 2018, at 1:23 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> Hi Farzaneh,
>
> thanks for the mention. to be accurate, the joint meetings predates my
> term as far as I recall. In fact we got things done there, for example, the
>  CCWG on Internet Governance was the result of a joint effort between ALAC
> and NCSG in Buenos Aires meeting in 2013 and then evolved to full
> cross-community working group when chartered by GNSO, ALAC, and ccNSO. We
> also had joint efforts: as NCSG pushed for new gTLD applicant support in
> GNSO (And there was a lot of resistance), we got ALAC support and had the
> joint WG between GNSO and ALAC known as JAS WG. I think there were also
> some joint statements before.
>
> while I cannot explain why we didn't have joint meetings lately as it may
> be the result of follow-up and/or scheduling issues, I see the invitation
> for Barcelona meeting as a good thing and we can follow-up. As you
> indicated, I think we have several areas of agreements on several topics,
> while not for a few others and that is normal.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le mar. 2 oct. 2018 à 07:52, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> Wolfgang brought up the collaboration of NCSG and ALAC and its improvement
> on a thread on NCUC mailing list, I thought I bring it up here and give it
> some thoughts.
>
> ALAC and NCSG have long been working with one another. This relation
> existed since Rafik was the chair of NCSG and he had maintained a
> connection with ALAC and worked with Olivier. (Rafik can add more details
> but this is what I heard was happening during Rafik time). When I was the
> chair of NCUC we started our joint NCUC/At Large outreach, that tradition
> is still in place until now. We also did an NCSG/ALAC outreach during the
> policy forum in Panama.
>
> No doubt there is some more work to be done. We have some convergences but
> we also have some commonalities. NCSG  invited them to NCSG open session in
> Barcelona which they kindly accepted and we will have a 30-minute
> discussion with them.
>
>
> I think what NCSG needs to do instead of thinking about who to just
> collaborate with, is what goals we are pursuing and then see where we can
> forge connections and relations. We diverge on some issues with ALAC and on
> some issues we have commonalities. We clarify these and see if we can
> support each other's work when we have commonalities.
>
> Some might think that because we criticize ALAC's governance or are not in
> favor of excessively funding ALAC efforts, we are against them. We are not
> against ALAC. We provide our opinion and feedback when asked (for example
> in case of the recent review or the budget). We initiate collaboration when
> there are commonalities and we do events with them. We should also remember
> that ALAC does not have solely a civil society position but an end user
> position which includes businesses etc. So we don't always hold hands.
>
>
> Best
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
>

-- 
*Bruna Martins dos Santos *

Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
@boomartins
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181003/48c3335f/attachment.htm>