<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Hi Farzy, hi Ayden <br>
</p>
<p>(and hi all)<br>
</p>
<p>Agree that the 3rd proposal might fit the best - it's one of our
current concerns at ICANN but it also has a much broader
implications than within ICANN spaces (and you put it into a
broader perspective of IG anyway). There are already enough
examples how voluntary practices (including content regulation)
can become commonly accepted guidelines and then binding
obligations. Very timely topic - we all know this; should be a
very interesting session. <br>
</p>
<p>I find Ayden's proposal also worth to discuss. It will be a more
focused topic since there is a lot to discuss already but also a
forward looking theme to submit. Could be a great choice. <br>
</p>
<p>If we are to submit a couple of them, I think proposal number 3
would be my top choice, and then either RDS/WHOIS and number two
(on MS model) from you. <br>
</p>
<p>Ready to take part in further elaborating if necessary. I also
hope there will be NCUC members available to carry out the
outreach at the Rightscon, assume this is also the idea behind the
submission?</p>
<p>Thanks for bringing this forward!<br>
</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Tanya <br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 25/11/16 16:02, Ayden Férdeline
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:HzyHO2FsFieQtC0rsWIhBckZjC-ofLReu20YEJ5R11W6S5saAQMn8cybn8ZmaQUQwpVKoOR76c0Rxoi1vqX1MZs478g33dWm3KZ6VVpxrgY=@ferdeline.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div>Thanks for putting forward these proposals, Farzi. I like
proposals 2 and 3 the most, but of those two, I feel like
proposal 3 would be the better fit for Rightscon. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Another idea would be to convene a panel on the state of the
Registration Directory Service; where the WHOIS protocol has
come from, what WHOIS is today, why it is problematic from the
perspective of privacy, and how it is evolving – for better or
for worse. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think that Rightscon would a great forum for this
conversation to take place, because it attracts a diverse
audience of policy and advocacy professionals who are fighting
censorship, mass surveillance, and Internet access obstacles in
different regions of the world. This is an audience that is as
committed as we are to protecting vulnerable populations from
cyber attacks, doxing, and swatting – all behaviours that the
WHOIS protocol, in its present form, unfortunately harbours –
and it would be great to have these voices on our side, ideally
participating in future public consultation exercises on how the
RDS evolves.<br>
</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best wishes,<br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="protonmail_signature_block ">
<div class="protonmail_signature_block-user ">
<div>Ayden Férdeline<br>
</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
title="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline"
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline">linkedin.com/in/ferdeline</a><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="protonmail_signature_block-proton
protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="protonmail_quote">
<div>-------- Original Message --------<br>
</div>
<div>Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Proposals for Rightscon<br>
</div>
<div>Local Time: 25 November 2016 4:31 PM<br>
</div>
<div>UTC Time: 25 November 2016 14:31<br>
</div>
<div>From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com">farzaneh.badii@gmail.com</a><br>
</div>
<div>To: NCUC-discuss <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org"><ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org></a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi NCUC members,<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Rightscon deadline for proposal submission is on 5th
December, and we need to draft a couple of proposals to
talk about issues that NCUC finds relevant at this
point.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> NCUC organized a session at RightsCon 2016 in San
Francisco. I think a good opportunity.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Here is the website: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://rightscon.org/">http://rightscon.org/</a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I have three suggestions and welcome other
suggestions relevant to NCUC's mission, and edits and
comments on these proposals to be submitted. We should
only submit one proposal as NCUC and the final
description should go into more detail.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Proposal 1. Jurisdictional issues </b>and domain
name administration - we will talk about how ICANN's
jurisdiction affects domain name policies and if it
restricts access to applying for new gTLDs as well as
affecting domain name rights.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Proposal 2. Adopting Multistakeholder Processes on
the Internet: The Case of ICANN</b><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>ICANN is a private corporation that makes policies
affecting domain name registrants globally. Unlike some
other Internet corporations and platforms that take
decisions unilaterally, ICANN uses a multistakeholder
process for policymaking. Multistakeholder governance is
a positive aspect of ICANN governance process. But
sometimes there might be a circumvention of a process in
generating the policies which might hamper the
multistakeholder nature of ICANN governance. Considering
the positive and negative aspects of ICANN's governance
mechanism, the session will address the following
question: Can ICANN's multistakeholder model be used on
other platforms and even social platforms to govern
their process? <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Proposal 3. Content Regulation and private
ordering at Internet governance institutions</b><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Private ordering is the generation, implementation
and enforcement of policies by a private entity. It
has been a phenomenon on the Internet since the
governments' oversight was weak or non-existent. Private
ordering is used in internet governance institutions
such as ICANN which mainly carry out their policies and
implement them through a multistakeholder process and
contractual agreements. Such agreements and policies
must not lead ICANN to become a content regulator on the
Internet. This session will discuss: What is content
regulation on the Internet and does ICANN's policies
affect the content on the Internet. If it does how so
and why and how can we prevent ICANN from having such a
role. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>-- <br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_signature">Farzaneh<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss">http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>