I agree with Michael, and yet, I would still keep a few concrete 
examples in our presentation -- such as trademark and free expression. 
It is incredibly unfair to me that the official updates to the GAC from 
the Rights Protection Mechanisms Working come only from the World 
Intellectual Property Organization and the Intellectual Property 
Organization. It gives the GAC only one side of the issues and 
concerns... and it's a great time to start correcting the imbalance!

Best, Kathy


On 2/11/2018 5:13 PM, Michael Karanicolas wrote:
> +1 - I think Kathy makes an excellent suggestion.
>
> However, I wonder if we could broaden it out a bit. Someone at the
> intersessional (Stephanie?) mentioned a similar issue in line with the
> GDPR, and noted that the GAC's position was likely influenced by the
> fact that their representatives were drawn from areas connected to IP
> and trade, rather than data protection, privacy, human rights, etc.
>
> Could we ask the representatives more generally about how they develop
> their policy positions, and whether and how they consult with human
> rights/privacy/data protection voices in government, or with domestic
> NGOs or civil society voices, in formulating the policy positions that
> they bring to ICANN - maybe phrasing the question a bit more broadly
> than just asking directly about the RPMs. I feel like this might need
> to be approached delicately, but it may be a good question to get the
> GAC delegates themselves to reconsider...
>
> Michael
>
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Kathy Kleiman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hi Farzi, I would like to talk with the GAC about Free Expression and Due
>> Process. The GAC has an uncomfortable history of only listening to the
>> intellectual property community on matters of the RPMs*, but not actually
>> hearing anything from us about concerns for free expression, fair use and
>> fair dealing and due process to ensure that organizations', individuals' and
>> entrepreneurs' domain names (and their entire websites, etc.) are not seized
>> without a fair process.
>>
>> Especially with the GAC's interest in human rights, we should talk with them
>> about the Rights Protections Mechanisms Working Group and why their (GAC's)
>> concerns for human rights should be playing out in this Working Group as
>> well as many other parts of ICANN.
>>
>> Best and tx for asking, Kathy
>>
>> (By way of background to anyone who is interested:
>> *RPMs => "rights protections mechanisms" which balance trademark rights and
>> domain name registrant rights in domain names. The Uniform Dispute
>> Resolution Policy (UDRP) and Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) are two of the
>> ways that trademark owners can seek to obtain, suspend and cancel domain
>> names of registrants. When the domain names happens to be (or include) an
>> ordinary word, such as fox, a common industry term such as mobile, or a
>> popular first and last name such as Ashley or Smith, there is a tension
>> because all of these terms are trademarked, and yet all of these terms are
>> in use in a myriad of commercial and noncommercial ways. If you are
>> interested in these issues, please let me know.)
>>
>>
>> On 2/11/2018 1:20 PM, farzaneh badii wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ganga,
>>
>> As much as the issues you raised are of importance, they are not within
>> ICANN mission and not what ICANN does.
>>
>> At ICANN we do domain name policy so our questions should be related to
>> that.
>>
>> We can talk about Domain Name Abuse and the role of Public Safety Working
>> Group at GAC.
>>
>> Anything else members would want to discuss? I need to send them the topics
>> this week.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 3:26 PM, gangadhar panday
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> I suggest INTERNET SHUTDOWNS and CHEAPER CONNECTIVITY as  topics for
>>> discussion.
>>> Best wishes - Ganga
>>>
>>> On Feb 6, 2018 11:06 AM, Ayden Férdeline <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you for arranging this bilateral, Farzaneh. It is great that we are
>>> continuing the dialogue with the GAC and that they have found the time to
>>> meet with us again. An excellent signal that our profile is rising within
>>> the community. Thanks for all your work making this happen!
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Ayden
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> On 6 February 2018 6:38 PM, farzaneh badii <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> We will have a meeting with GAC in Puerto Rico during ICANN 61 on Monday,
>>> March 12. They have given us a nice early morning meeting, 8.30 to 9 before
>>> the opening ceremony.
>>>
>>> Other than GDPR and Privacy, what other topics would you like to discuss?
>>> Consider that we have a limited time, we will compile your suggested topics
>>> and see what will be approved by NCSG PC. When we have decided the topics,
>>> then we will choose some NCSG members who are the subject matter experts to
>>> be present on the podium.
>>>
>>> In our last meeting, I opened with a couple of words about NCUC (it was an
>>> NCUC meeting). This time I will tell them what NCSG is breifly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>