ICANN 73 - Get ready and request for inputs for our meeting with the board.

Fri Mar 4 12:51:18 EET 2022

Thanks for the valuable info. an honor Yes, before possible regulations or
problems of companies and internet providers too. Users' rights must be
respected and highly vulnerable sectors.

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Libre
de virus. www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

El vie, 4 mar 2022 a las 14:37, Bruna Martins dos Santos (<
bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>) escribió:

> Thanks everyone for the inputs! These are our final questions/talking
> points:
>
> NCSG and Board Meeting -  ICANN73
>
> ICANN and Human Rights
>
> 1. In its Resolutions the Board does not mention the impact that its
> decision might have on human rights in general. What do you think about the
> possibility of adding what impact if any each resolution you pass might
> have on rights? We give you an example. You raised concerns about
> recommendation number 12, of EPDP on WHOIS which talked about deleting the
> organization field for the registrars. You raised issues with that and the
> matter was resolved later on through the GNSO small team. But did you also
> consider if the issue you raised with deleting the organization field might
> have some impact on registrant's rights?
>
> 2. In your recent resolutions about WHOIS, the board has mentioned -
> sometimes - that WHOIS data is to identify the registrants, and that the
> deletion of data can lead to not identifying the registrant and that might
> pertain to global public interest and ICANN mission. Would you be able to
> explain to us how the board came to this conclusion about the data being
> used to identify registrants instead of providing contactability? We would
> like to prevent this wrong narrative that WHOIS is to identify the domain
> name registrant. It is not in ICANN mission to identify domain name
> registrants.
>
> See: "Whereas, the ICANN Board chose not to adopt implementation advice
> 2(b) of Recommendation 12, given that the deletion of the contents in the
> organization field might result in the loss of identifying information
> about who the registrant is and might not be consistent with ICANN's
> mission or in the global public interest." Board resolution February 2022,
> https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2022-02-24-en#2.b
>
>
> Jurisdiction
>
> 3. We (the community) gave recommendations in WS jurisdiction around
> almost 4 years ago to explore receiving an OFAC license. That has not been
> done to this day. Is the new round of gTLD gonna be closed to all
> sanctioned countries?
>
>
> ICANNs relationship with governments the European "digital sovereignty"
> discussions and the DNS
>
> 4. In our last conversations we have briefly addressed upcoming European
> legislative initiatives that could have some impact on ICANN and the DNS
> such as the DSA and NIS2. In light of the European Union's recent study
> that assessed the scope, magnitude and impact of DNS abuse and provided
> input for possible policy measures, we would like to ask you whether the
> board expects any sort of increased pressure from governments to outsource
> some of their internet regulatory problems to ICANN in the near future?
>
> Future of SSAD
>
> 5. Recently the org published an Operational design assessment about the
> SSAD in order to gather input for further discussions about the SSAD and
> for understanding how registration data is used more broadly. We are also
> aware of the attempt to hire a market researcher/firm to better understand
> the global demand for an SSAD and conduct a research that was aimed to gain
> more data around 1) the expected volume of the requests, 2) the number of
> SSAD users, and 3) such users’ price sensitivity. In light of that we have
> a rather open question to you which is about the future of the SSAD, and
> what should the community expect as next steps for this initiative + would
> be Board be able to provide us with any sort of timeline for upcoming steps
> ?.
>
>
> Best,
> B
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 6:17 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> For our Board meeting I was wondering if we could pose the following
>> questions:
>>
>> 1. In its Resolutions the Board does not mention the impact that its
>> decision might have on human rights in general. What do you think about the
>> possibility of adding what impact if any each resolution you pass might
>> have on rights? We give you an example. You raised concerns about
>> recommendation number 12, of EPDP on WHOIS which talked about deleting the
>> organization field for the registrars. You raised issues with that and the
>> matter was resolved later on through the GNSO small team. But did you also
>> consider if the issue you raised with deleting the organization field might
>> have some impact on registrant's rights?
>>
>> 2. In your resolutions about WHOIS you sometimes mention that WHOIS data
>> is to identify the registrants. You have even gone so far to argue that
>> deletion of data can lead to not identifying the registrant and that might
>> in global public interest and ICANN mission. Can we clarify that WHOIS is
>> not to identify registrants but to actually provide contactability. Does
>> the Board agree with that? We would like to prevent this wrong narrative
>> that WHOIS is to identify the domain name registrant. It is not in ICANN
>> mission to identify domain name registrants.
>>
>> See: "Whereas, the ICANN Board chose not to adopt implementation advice
>> 2(b) of Recommendation 12, given that the deletion of the contents in the
>> organization field might result in the loss of identifying information
>> about who the registrant is and might not be consistent with ICANN's
>> mission or in the global public interest." Board resolution February 2022,
>> https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2022-02-24-en#2.b
>>
>>
>> 3. We (the community) gave recommendations in WS jurisdiction around
>> almost 4 years ago to explore receiving an OFAC license. That has not been
>> done to this day. Is the new round of gTLD gonna be closed to
>> all sanctioned countries?
>>
>>
>> 4. What structures do you have in place to follow the Bylaws consistently
>> in the future? In some IRP panel Declarations we see that they are of the
>> opinion that in some instances the Board did not follow the Bylaws.
>> (especially in delegation of .NewgTLDs). What structures do you have now in
>> place to follow the Bylaws in the future? (other than the accountability
>> mechanisms that the community has)
>>
>>
>>
>> Pick or choose as you see appropriate.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 11:32 AM Benjamin Akinmoyeje <benakin at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Bruna,
>>> This came up strongly in our last members meeting - possibility for the
>>> board to empower the non commercial stakeholders group in form of subsidy
>>> especially in the virtual ICANN era.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Benjamin
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 9:44 PM Ephraim Percy Kenyanito <
>>> hello at ekenyanito.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Bruna,
>>>>
>>>> Can we have a conversation aiming at a commitment from ICANN on them to
>>>> conduct a HRIA follow up to the 2019 one and having regular schedules?
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Ephraim Percy Kenyanito
>>>> On 2/17/22 22:19, Bruna Martins dos Santos wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> Our discussion topics for the meeting with the Board are due tomorrow.
>>>> I have sent this email about a week ago to the list and would really
>>>> appreciate it if anyone has suggestions of topics.
>>>>
>>>> Just as a suggestion, and as we see things pop up prior to the meeting,
>>>> id say that two potential topics would be SSAD Implementation and the next
>>>> gTLDs round, but we still need to structure our questions on these two.
>>>> Anything else ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Bruna
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 3:00 AM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear NCSG,
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope this email finds you well and healthier than I am right now (ha)
>>>>> !
>>>>>
>>>>> I just wanted to send everyone a short reminder about ICANN73 that's
>>>>> taking place from March 7-10, <https://73.schedule.icann.org/>
>>>>> virtually, and with its Prep Week taking place from Feb 22-24
>>>>> <https://73.schedule.icann.org/prep-week-schedule> (also virtually).
>>>>>
>>>>> Our agenda for this upcoming meeting, and the first one in 2022, will
>>>>> be the following:
>>>>> - NCSG Policy Meeting
>>>>> - NCSG Membership Meeting; and
>>>>> - NCSG Meeting with the ICANN Board.
>>>>> (+ GNSO Council and PDPs meetings, our Constituency meetings and our
>>>>> members participation in any policy session or plenary)
>>>>>
>>>>> For our meeting with the Board, we need to submit the talking points
>>>>> until Feb 16. So I would like to ask you all for some suggestions of topics
>>>>> for this conversation that is open to all members. I assume there is still
>>>>> interest in asking questions about the future of ICANN Meetings or the long
>>>>> term effects of the pandemic at ICANNs MSM due to the community burnout and
>>>>> some PDP implementation issues but would be also interested in us having a
>>>>> conversation about more things.
>>>>>
>>>>> With regards to our NCSG Membership I am also welcoming any
>>>>> suggestions of agenda topics or people to try to invite. The time to shape
>>>>> the agenda is now!
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking forward to hearing from you and seeing you online.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos  *
>>>>>
>>>>> German Chancellor Fellow 21' (Bundeskanzler-Stipendiatin) | Alexander
>>>>> von Humboldt Foundation <https://www.humboldt-foundation.de/>
>>>>>
>>>>> Visiting Researcher (Gastwissenschaftlerin) | Wissenschaftszentrum
>>>>> Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB) <https://wzb.eu/en>
>>>>>
>>>>> Member | Coalizão Direitos na Rede <https://direitosnarede.org.br/>
>>>>> Chair | Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN
>>>>> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/ncsg>
>>>>> Co-Coordinator | Internet Governance Caucus  <https://igcaucus.org/>
>>>>>
>>>>> Twitter: @boomartins <https://twitter.com/boomartins> // Skype:
>>>>> bruna.martinsantos
>>>>> *bruna.martinsdossantos at wzb.eu <bruna.martinsdossantos at wzb.eu>* and
>>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos  *
>>>>
>>>> German Chancellor Fellow 21' (Bundeskanzler-Stipendiatin) | Alexander
>>>> von Humboldt Foundation <https://www.humboldt-foundation.de/>
>>>>
>>>> Visiting Researcher (Gastwissenschaftlerin) | Wissenschaftszentrum
>>>> Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB) <https://wzb.eu/en>
>>>>
>>>> Member | Coalizão Direitos na Rede <https://direitosnarede.org.br/>
>>>> Chair | Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN
>>>> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/ncsg>
>>>> Co-Coordinator | Internet Governance Caucus  <https://igcaucus.org/>
>>>>
>>>> Twitter: @boomartins <https://twitter.com/boomartins> // Skype:
>>>> bruna.martinsantos
>>>> *bruna.martinsdossantos at wzb.eu <bruna.martinsdossantos at wzb.eu>* and
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>
> --
>
> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>
> German Chancellor Fellow 21' (Bundeskanzler-Stipendiatin) | Alexander von
> Humboldt Foundation <https://www.humboldt-foundation.de/>
>
> Visiting Researcher (Gastwissenschaftlerin) | Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin
> für Sozialforschung (WZB) <https://wzb.eu/en>
>
> Member | Coalizão Direitos na Rede <https://direitosnarede.org.br/>
> Chair | Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN
> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/ncsg>
> Co-Coordinator | Internet Governance Caucus  <https://igcaucus.org/>
>
> Twitter: @boomartins <https://twitter.com/boomartins> // Skype:
> bruna.martinsantos
> *bruna.martinsdossantos at wzb.eu <bruna.martinsdossantos at wzb.eu>* and
> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com
>

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Libre
de virus. www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20220304/b99b5854/attachment.htm>