[NCUC-DISCUSS] Proposals for Rightscon

[Dr. Tatiana Tropina]

Hi Farzy, hi Ayden

(and hi all)

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.

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.

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.

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?

Thanks for bringing this forward!

Cheers

Tanya


On 25/11/16 16:02, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden Férdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Proposals for Rightscon
>> Local Time: 25 November 2016 4:31 PM
>> UTC Time: 25 November 2016 14:31
>> From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
>> To: NCUC-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>
>> Hi NCUC members,
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>  NCUC organized a session at RightsCon 2016 in San Francisco. I think
>> a good opportunity.
>>
>> Here is the website: http://rightscon.org/
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> *Proposal 1. Jurisdictional issues *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.
>>
>> *Proposal 2. Adopting Multistakeholder Processes on the Internet: The
>> Case of ICANN*
>>
>> 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? 
>>
>> *Proposal 3. Content Regulation and private  ordering at Internet
>> governance institutions*
>>
>> 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. 
>>
>> -- 
>> Farzaneh
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20161125/62b5dc19/attachment-0002.html>