[NCUC-DISCUSS] Proposals for Rightscon

[Michael Oghia]

I support proposal 3 and Ayden's suggestion as well.

Best,
-Michael

On Nov 25, 2016 4:01 PM, "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think the proposal 3 can be something similar to High Interest Topic
> session we had in Hyderabad (https://schedule.icann.org/
> event/8g4p/dns-and-content-regulation-ncuc-group) . that is definitely
> needs some changes and adjustment to the formats used in Rightscon.
>
> for this year edition of rightscon, we had session about Domain names
> policies in general with Robin and Mitch from EFF. We covered  new gTLD,
> whois, UDRP etc https://rightscon.sched.org/event/6Ih0/never-
> underestimate-domain-names-policies. so a more specific topic would be
> helpful and natural continuity of what we did before.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2016-11-26 2:42 GMT+09:00 Dr. Tatiana Tropina <t.tropina at mpicc.de>:
>
>> 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>
>> <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 listNcuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.orghttp://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161125/1b3d6088/attachment-0002.html>