Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:04:49 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi Bruna,
Tx for sharing this. I think we are missing a question:
==> What should Registry private commitments never include? [Answer:
issues that should be settled subject to the PDP process and consensus
policies]
Do you know the date and time this session will take place? That will
help in finding our NCSG representative!
Best, Kathy
Quoting Bruna Martins dos Santos <[log in to unmask]>:
> Hey all,
>
> Hope this email finds you well!
>
> I am writing just to inform you that NCSG has joined the planning teams of
> the two plenary sessions of ICANN70, and I highlight below important points
> regarding the RVCs Plenary Session initial planning meeting:
>
> *1. Registry Voluntary Commitments *
> Main outcome would be to discuss enforceable mechanisms for contracted
> parties to make commitments to the community, enforced by ICANN contract
> compliance and so forth. Session will also present a short discussion on
> PICs after the 2012 round and the Subpro process that took us to today's
> moment of RVCs.
>
> *Introduction* - History of PICs and RVCs (Jeff Neuman)
>
> *Guiding questions*
>
> 1.
>
> On the assumption that PICs/RVCs are the main mechanism for Contracted
> Parties to make enforceable commitments to the ICANN community
> (or public),
> are there limits on their enforceability, e.g. under the ICANN Bylaws?
> 2.
>
> Are there specific challenges with enforcing PICs/RVCs as part of the
> Registry Agreement (i.e. binding contract that all gTLD registry operators
> enter into with ICANN)?
> 1.
>
> Panelists should give real-life examples if possible.
> 3.
>
> What are the education gaps that ICANN org, Contracted Parties, or other
> parties (if any) should be addressing prior to further gTLD expansion?
> 4.
>
> How can enforcement of PICs/RVCs be framed to avoid the risk that ICANN
> org will need to make potential decisions on content?
> 1.
>
> What registrant rights or interests need to be protected?
> 2.
>
> What practical options can panelists suggest?
>
>
> This session shall have discussants, and I have secured a slot for NCSG,
> but I have the deadline until friday to inform staff about who our
> discussant will be.
>
> best,
>
> --
>
> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>
> Advocacy Coordinator | Data Privacy Brazil Research
> <https://www.dataprivacybr.org/en/>
>
> Member | Coalizão Direitos na Rede <https://direitosnarede.org.br/>
> Chair | Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN
> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/ncsg>
> Co-Coordinator | Internet Governance Caucus <https://igcaucus.org/>
>
> Twitter: @boomartins <https://twitter.com/boomartins> // Skype:
> bruna.martinsantos
> [log in to unmask] and [log in to unmask]
|
|
|