[PC-NCSG] Fwd: Policy Advisory Board Model for Regulated/Sensitive Strings

Thu Feb 6 17:26:56 EET 2014

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Personally, I oppose PICS for pulling ICANN into the
content-regluation business. I don't think ICANN should be building up
even further apparatus to do so.

- --Wendy

On 02/05/2014 08:35 PM, David Cake wrote:
> I'm inclined to support. It will be unbalanced if we don't
> participate, for sure. But the PAB model looks to me to be one of
> the few suggestions that might make PICS actually have some
> meaningful public interest component, rather than just being a
> tick-list commitment of promising to do what the GAC (or those
> lobbying the GAC) said.
> 
> And by being involved in the debate we can work to ensure that the
> PICS system has meaningful participation from regulators, policy
> experts, etc.
> 
> David
> 
> 
> On 6 Feb 2014, at 6:02 am, Wendy Seltzer <wendy at seltzer.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Disinclined to support.  "Balanced"?
>> 
>> --Wendy
>> 
>> On 02/05/2014 04:25 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>> forwarded with permission
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -------- Original Message -------- Subject:     Policy Advisory
>>> Board Model for Regulated/Sensitive Strings Date:     Wed, 5
>>> Feb 2014 10:43:21 -0500 From:     Ron Andruff
>>> <randruff at rnapartners.com> To:     <maria.farrell at gmail.com>,
>>> "'David Cake'" <dave at DIFFERENCE.COM.AU>, <avri at acm.org> CC:
>>> <robin at ipjustice.org>, "Olivier Crepin-Leblond " <ocl at gih.com>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dear Maria,
>>> 
>>> Dear Avri,
>>> 
>>> Dear David,
>>> 
>>> Robin recently advised me that she is no longer on the NCSG
>>> Policy Committee and that, in fact, the three of you are
>>> leading that effort. For this reason I am contacting you
>>> today.
>>> 
>>> For the past several months, Marilyn Cade, Phil Corwin and I
>>> have been briefing ICANN thought leaders and AC/C leadership
>>> teams about the Policy Advisory Board (PAB) model that we have
>>> proposed to the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) and the
>>> ICANN Board NGPC.   As you know the GAC Beijing Communique 
>>> <https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Beijing%20Communique%20april2013_Final.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1365666376000&api=v2>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
raised issues about a large number of applications for strings that are
>>> associated with regulated industries.  The PAB model offers a
>>> path to move many of these off of the sidetrack they are
>>> currently on back into the path of delegation through the
>>> establishment of balanced and globally representative bodies
>>> that will ensure such new gTLDs act ? first and foremost ? in
>>> the public interest. For further background and the full detail
>>> on the PAB model, here is a link to my November 2013 post on 
>>> CircleID:http://www.circleid.com/posts/20131104_policy_advisory_boards_cornerstone_pics_public_interest_commitment/.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
We would be most grateful to have NCUC consider joining with us in
>>> supporting this initiative to ensure that applicant PICS are
>>> indeed established, as requested by the GAC. _Our last chance
>>> is now_.  The GAC Buenos Aires Communique calls on the NGPC to
>>> provide ?/a briefing on whether the Board considers that the
>>> existing PICS/ /(including 3c) fully implements this advice.?/
>>> 
>>> We feel that adopting an approach such as the Policy Advisory
>>> Board offers several benefits, and a path to address the
>>> concerns raised in the GAC advice.
>>> 
>>> 1.Policy Advisory Boards (PAB) as a PICS enforcement model:
>>> 
>>> ?Mechanism for implementation of GAC safeguard advice for
>>> protecting public interest
>>> 
>>> ?Ensures separation of registry technical management and
>>> PAB-guided policy for those new gTLDs related to sensitive
>>> industries and professions.
>>> 
>>> ??One size does not fit all? ? the PAB proposed model is
>>> f_lexible  and while it does not propose required
>>> participation_ of any specific regulator, self-regulatory
>>> agency, or civil society entity, it is intended to provide an
>>> open and balanced advisory body to all bona fide parties
>>> 
>>> ?PAB can address registrant eligibility criteria, registry
>>> policies, and other relevant matters relating to safeguards
>>> implementation
>>> 
>>> ?Represented groups can include accrediting organizations;
>>> experts & advocates; safety/consumer coalitions &
>>> organizations; ?Internet freedom? & human rights groups;
>>> Internet commerce experts; national & global law enforcement
>>> entities
>>> 
>>> ?In the case of managing government interests, including
>>> regulatory entities, to participate on PABs, the TLD operator
>>> should propose an approach to address engagement, either as
>>> members, or as observers, on how interested governments to
>>> determine which would be the initial PAB participants and which
>>> will rotate in each year
>>> 
>>> ?2. PABs provide an extra layer of support for ICANN compliance
>>> due to their intrinsic and inclusive nature:
>>> 
>>> ?The PAB model meets the NGPC call for registries to provide a
>>> ?clear pathway? for creation of a working relationship with
>>> relevant industry regulatory or self-regulatory bodies
>>> 
>>> ?Broadened pathway accommodates participation of relevant
>>> consumer advocacy and other civil society groups
>>> 
>>> ?Ensures that representatives of consumer end-users of goods
>>> and services offered by registrants in regulated
>>> industry/profession gTLDs also have appropriate input in
>>> framing registry policies
>>> 
>>> The PAB is consistent with new gTLD program goals of promoting 
>>> innovation and competition in a manner that benefits global
>>> Internet user community, while also respecting that certain
>>> string applications are associated with public interest
>>> responsibilities.  We present it as a framework or model, which
>>> has the flexibility to be adapted to a particular industry
>>> sector.
>>> 
>>> This past week, Marilyn, Olivier, Alan, Evan and I sent a
>>> follow on letter to the NGPC Chair to further the cause 
>>> (https://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/andruff-et-al-to-chalaby-27jan14-en).
>>>
>>>
>>> 
We have been privately informed by a leading member of the GAC that
>>> certain members of the NGPC view: /??the PAB model positively
>>> and that it can certainly contribute to close a number of
>>> loopholes or gaps in the current safeguards??/.
>>> 
>>> Yesterday, I received the attached letter from Christine
>>> Willett, so it is clear that the fight for the public interest
>>> over the interests of the ?New gTLD Customer Service? division
>>> of ICANN (as her email remarkably was received from) is on.
>>> 
>>> Irrespective of the timing of Willett?s letter, we had been
>>> planning to reach out to enroll you in this important
>>> initiative this week.  Now, more than ever, it is evident that
>>> the NGPC and ICANN CEO are driven by a desire to get to market
>>> with the new gLTDs and that they have no desire to see public
>>> interest commitments holding things up.  However, ICANN has to
>>> have a public interest accountability aspect or it has no 
>>> legitimacy.  We need to rapidly build broad community support
>>> if the public interest is to prevail over portfolio gTLD
>>> applicant interests.
>>> 
>>> We welcome hearing your thoughts on this at your earliest
>>> convenience.
>>> 
>>> Thank you in advance for your consideration.
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> RA
>>> 
>>> *Ron Andruff*
>>> 
>>> *RNA Partners*
>>> 
>>> *www.rnapartners.com <http://www.rnapartners.com> *
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
>>> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613 Policy
>> Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Fellow, Berkman Center
>> for Internet & Society at Harvard University Visiting Fellow,
>> Yale Law School Information Society Project 
>> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ https://www.chillingeffects.org/ 
>> https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
>> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 

- -- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
http://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlLzqb0ACgkQuuui10VsrVGrtQCeNVLUyU9Y5FZkKi6a7seGFjjM
DP8An2g1VU/Z3Gd12ZW21H5k9w8+W9D3
=jir+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----