ICANN and the Public interest

Tue Oct 8 21:24:22 EEST 2019

I can! Just loop me in the doc

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 4:11 PM Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> wrote:

> Amr,
>
> Thank you so much for stepping up on this. And for raising important
> points on the list.
>
> Given that noone else has written back yet and given the short amount of
> time we have, I guess the best way forward would be to draft an initial
> response and then take it from there on the list over two days’ time from
> the 11th so that the PC would also have time to review the document before
> submission time. What do you think?
>
> I’d be more than happy to help post initial drafting! Anyone else willing
> to help Amr and I with this?
>
> Best,
>
> Elsa
> —
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I might be able to help draft something, but don’t believe I’ll be able
>> to begin before Friday, 11 October. My personal views on how ICANN should
>> tackle the “Global Public Interest” (GPI) are pretty consistent with the
>> recent text prepared by Farzaneh and Elsa, which was included in a recent letter
>> from the GNSO Council to the ICANN Board
>> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/drazek-et-al-to-icann-board-09sep19-en.pdf>.
>> It wouldn’t be too challenging to elaborate on this further.
>>
>> However, I should note that in the past, the NCSG has not had a consensus
>> position on this topic (kind of similar to the recent discussion on ICANN
>> regulating gTLD domain name registration pricing). GPI hasn’t come up on
>> this mailing list in a while, so I honestly don’t recall who had previously
>> engaged in our discussion on this, nor what their rationale was. Apologies
>> for that. I do, however, know quite well what my views on the subject are.
>> :-) I just hesitate to present those as NCSG views, as I do not know that
>> it would be correct for me to do so.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Amr
>>
>> On Oct 8, 2019, at 5:07 AM, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> The deadline for submission of this comment is the 18th of this month and
>> according to Rafik noone has volunteered to write an NCSG response yet. I’d
>> be happy to help support the team of volunteers anyway possible, but cannot
>> write the comment myself due to a big workload on the council side. However
>> I would really encourage a small team of us to engage with this topic
>> urgently.
>>
>> Any volunteers willing to work together?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> E.
>> —
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 10:39 PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar <
>> mesumbeslin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for references Elsa. I'll go dig out the archives.
>>>
>>> Very best regards
>>>
>>> Tomslin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 at 11:27, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It’s also good to note that these two instances were not the only ones,
>>>> however I shared them here promptly, for the sake of providing a couple of
>>>> examples. I’m sure others on the PC would be able to provide more details :)
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Elsa
>>>> —
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:24 PM Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey Tomslin,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the question!
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually in Kobe, (off the top of my head) we had a meeting with the
>>>>> board where Global Public Interest was discussed. I’m pretty sure if you
>>>>> look at the archives of that meeting which I think was recorded, you’d find
>>>>> several statements by NCSG reps on the issue in conversation with board
>>>>> members. I remember quite vividly that we mentioned, it’s best not to use
>>>>> the term loosely, if at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> We’ve also raised the issue of the use of “global public interest”
>>>>> most recently at the GNSO Council level. The board recently sent a letter
>>>>> to the coyncil about Phase 1 of the EPDP and referred to “Global Public
>>>>> Interest” in their reasoning for concern within the letter. NCSG pushed for
>>>>> expressing concern about the use of the term in the letter from the GNSO
>>>>> Council and our wording was incorporated into the GNSO Council’s reply.
>>>>> This should definitely be in the archives.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apologies that i will not be able to provide links at the moment,
>>>>> however I thought the question needed to be answered promptly.
>>>>>
>>>>> E.
>>>>> —
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 8:25 PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar <
>>>>> mesumbeslin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Milton for the nudge and thanks Rafik for the details.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> , you said "*Even though NCSG in the
>>>>>> past year as far as I’ve seen, has been pushing for not using the word from
>>>>>> the start,*" do we (NCSG) have any formal statement on this recorded
>>>>>> somewhere that I can take a look at?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tomslin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 at 10:05, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the details about public consultation below. I created a google doc
>>>>>>> so we can start the drafting for a NCSG Comment
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nZJ91SSW55Isl2iBAEASopfYnWcsgsBcXdB5hUUjNdI/edit.
>>>>>>> you can listen to webinar recordings  here
>>>>>>> https://community.icann.org/display/prjxplrpublicint/GPI+Toolkit .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From 18 September – 18 October 2019, a community consultation is
>>>>>>> taking place on the global public interest framework proposed by
>>>>>>> the ICANN Board. In reviewing the proposal, the ICANN Board is asking the
>>>>>>> ICANN community to consider the following questions for input to the ICANN
>>>>>>> Board:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1.  What are your thoughts on the proposed framework approach? Do
>>>>>>> you have any suggestions for how it could be improved?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2.  What are your thoughts on the proposed approach for decisions
>>>>>>> in the ICANN ecosystem to be accompanied by a consideration of their impact
>>>>>>> on the global public interest (as well as an explanation regarding
>>>>>>> what is meant by the GPI in the specific case)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3.  How do you see this working for the Supporting Organization
>>>>>>> (SO), Advisory Committee (AC), constituency, group, review team, or
>>>>>>> cross-community working group (CCWG) to which you are contributing?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The global public interest is central to many of ICANN’s primary
>>>>>>> governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in
>>>>>>> facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework
>>>>>>> as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest.
>>>>>>> These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are
>>>>>>> made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the
>>>>>>> commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific
>>>>>>> recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the globalpublic interest.
>>>>>>> This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the
>>>>>>> public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper
>>>>>>> [r20.rs6.net]
>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-3D0014631p6ECz1koeg6ajMSzZrFT7DO05069BKNDJvhNpKDU-2D38mdcxCqJ1EJzj5gscgfkGfGj-2DFGI3o7d-5FcGAxvEYcLuDt-2DuNbFw7pLtAPwsOOBVyljJ-5FnOUkAdXGEq-5Fpqhnx9MAz7aDEHi3hvOaYb3gqWjXDXghZrpf0Ca1iUZzXdnGBbim2ZY09p7WU0m-2DXOMIhpn2CTVR7lR4v-2DDeX-5F4RZFHV0Vx2gnIRwJwkZKqQoiglVM4l6PG-2Df7xB-5FIkXMVwTDMtu5FHvXFhlTLLJIN5Jg-3D-3D-26c-3Dz44JySTIvEGqNJPIjwWImwF59dG21I-2DoxnM1Mz6G5PmaucLg5GaW-5Fg-3D-3D-26ch-3DFcbT1z5bmkz6UEfk6eUJehq3ywPR-5FHTaxr7BzhY6q17TcrAkO831rw-3D-3D&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=Zrm2TmioSoHmD-RVsf08eb9s33A4I2k08_uP0LOo_zA&s=Y1oSQaaaH67cndtqhCcGryOkThAU0RpFNJVzZzD0mGc&e=>.
>>>>>>> Community feedback is welcome by *Friday, 18 October 2019 via email
>>>>>>> at **gpitoolkit at icann.org <gpitoolkit at icann.org>*. After the
>>>>>>> community consultation, there will be a public session at ICANN66,
>>>>>>> followed by a Public Comment proceeding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le mar. 24 sept. 2019 à 08:53, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> a
>>>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks for sharing Milton!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ICANN seems adamant about using the terms on a context to context
>>>>>>>> basis given the new proposed path forward, also shared in two webinars this
>>>>>>>> month.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Even though NCSG in the past year as far as I’ve seen, has been
>>>>>>>> pushing for not using the word from the start, it seems we might have to
>>>>>>>> actively work on mitigating the risk of its use in a more structurally
>>>>>>>> biased way.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I’m keeping an eye out for any developments on the consultation
>>>>>>>> phase (even though I would have preferred a formal public comment phase
>>>>>>>> instead), but would also invite that we all have a discussion about the
>>>>>>>> proposed way forward by ICANN, more meticulously and collectively.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Elsa
>>>>>>>> —
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:59 PM Mueller, Milton L <
>>>>>>>> milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was reading some scholarly literature about public service
>>>>>>>>> broadcasting and came across this statement from a GigaNet colleague, Yik
>>>>>>>>> Chin:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> “The Constitution of the PRC indeed speaks the language of the
>>>>>>>>> Public Interest (PI), and the term regularly appears in legal provisions
>>>>>>>>> without definition. There have been no juridical interpretations of ‘PI’,
>>>>>>>>> either. This ambiguity gives discretionary power to the authorities to
>>>>>>>>> interpret ‘PI’ in ways that invade and deprive individuals of their rights.
>>>>>>>>> Chin, Y.C 2012.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Food for thought
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> School of Public Policy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Georgia Institute of Technology
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Elsa Saade
>>>>>>>> Consultant
>>>>>>>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>>>>>>>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Elsa Saade
>>>>> Consultant
>>>>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>>>>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Elsa Saade
>>>> Consultant
>>>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>>>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>>>
>>> --
>> --
>>
>> Elsa Saade
>> Consultant
>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>
>>
>> --
> --
>
> Elsa Saade
> Consultant
> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20191008/4b67af15/attachment.htm>