RE: [council] Re: Early draft: questions for our sessions with the Board and the GAC tomorrow

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I have a comment on the topic for the GAC addressing human rights.



I just want to make sure that we understand what is in the PDP, because I think 
there may be some interpretations that are being made that were not intended.



What the PDP states actually states is:



The initial report should contain the following elements . . . ."A statement on 
the WG discussion concerning impact of the proposed recommendations, which 
could consider areas such as economic, competition, operations, privacy and 
other rights, scalability and feasibility."



There was a lot of history to that statement.  The term "rights" was meant to 
include human rights, intellectual property rights, etc.  But to state that 
there must be an impact analysis on human rights for all PDPs is not 
necessarily the case.

Therefore, I have an issue talking with the GAC about the assessment of the 
impact of human rights being a requirement of PDP.   It is not a requirement, 
but it is an area that COULD be considered.


Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs

________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 4:07 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx GNSO
Subject: [council] Re: Early draft: questions for our sessions with the Board 
and the GAC tomorrow

Councillors,

My thanks to those who have already made comments or sent edits to the list I 
sent earlier.

Here is a new version of the list, which includes those comments. I have also 
added the suggested Board questions to us at the end of the document.

Stéphane

Board
Red Cross and Olympic Committee names: the GNSO is getting mixed messages from 
the Board and Staff. What exactly is expected of the GNSO in terms of policy 
development? If we send you a mtion this week, will you act on it?
Presenter: Alan Greenberg

WHOIS RT final report recommendation implementation: a discussion of the policy 
issues here versus the expectations that some may have that these 
recommendations could be implemented straight away.
Presenter: Jeff Neuman

IANA contract: can you provide any further information on this?
We expect the Board will amend and submit a revised ICANN proposal that 
addresses what NTIA says was lacking in the first proposal. Question: will the 
Council need to undertake any policy development to enable the revised proposal?
Presenter: Stéphane Van Gelder

RAA: The Board's Dakar resolution requested an Issue Report for a PDP "as 
quickly as possible" to address "remaining items that may be suited for a PDP" 
relating to the RAA. Given that negotiations are ongoing on certain topics 
between ICANN staff and the Registrars Stakeholder Group, and that the Final 
Report on the RAA was just issued (on which the Council will be expected to 
act) is it the Board's expectation that the time frame and specific topics for 
a PDP will be dependent on the duration and outcome of the negotiations?
What is the Board's view on the relationship between the scope of the topics to 
be negotiated directly and that for a PDP, especially as regards topics that 
may be considered policy matters?
Presenter: Mary Wong


GAC
What advice can the GAC give the GNSO about the human rights impact assessment 
requirements of the PDP in light of the United Nations Human Rights Councils 
recent HRC Panel on Freedom of Expression and the Internet?
For more background see reports about the Geneva Human Rights Council Session:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CnrqLUZ4hpEaCD_kxC0-FRTL_f8Hu_cKbxYT9fktj5E/edit?pli=1#<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CnrqLUZ4hpEaCD_kxC0-FRTL_f8Hu_cKbxYT9fktj5E/edit?pli=1>

http://www.ccianet.org/index.asp?bid=89&BlogEntryID=224&FormID=300&catid=0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edward-j-black/uns-itu-could-become-next_b_1332768.html
Presenter: Joy Liddicoat

RAA: Update from registrars. Why does the GAC think pushing for Whois 
verification will resolve cybercrime, and will you push for the same level of 
verification for all TLDs worldwide, including ccTLDs?
Another question (Wendy): How can the GNSO engage the GAC in discussion about 
the LEA recommendations, such as verification and regulations on privacy/proxy 
providers, so that the negotiations reflect realistic options from the 
viewpoint of the community?  We need to have these discussions in parallel, 
rather than having an unacceptable agreement come back to Council and be 
rejected on Policy grounds.
Presenter: Mason Cole


General suggestion from Jonathan Robinson
There are issues within each of these topics that we have grappled with and we 
would like to have a discussion with you on those issues.



Possible questions from the Board:

What will be in your view the medium-term impact of the new gTLD program on the 
structure of ICANN in general, and challenges it brings to the gNSO, its 
constituencies and policy development process. What are the potential issues 
and how to anticipate them?"  this I s a question they would like to have all 
parts of the community starting to consider.

Another question is: What is the view on the need for stronger protections 
against defensive registrations at the second level, and a shift to WHOIS data 
authentication at time of data submission?

Resolution of conflict with NPOC.

What is the Council's mid-term policy development calendar?