Very worrisome indeed, Milton. Clever (?) attempt to shrink ICANN's 
accountability space.

--c.a.

On 03-08-15 18:00, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
> Robin and other fellow NCSG-ers:
>
> Regarding human rights, I have been going through the CCWG report and
> found something very disturbing.
>
> On page 33, which is part of the section on “Principles” I noticed a big
> loophole opening up in the attempt to constrain ICANN’s actions by
> defining a limited mission. Paragraph 224 has been modified in a way
> that makes it LESS restrictive than before. It says that ICANN must take
> into account advice of governments, and the former language about how
> the advice must be consistent with its bylaws and its fundamental
> commitments and core values has been struck out.
>
> Can anyone who was in Paris tell me how this happened and whether it
> really is as bad as it looks?
>
> *From:*NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of
> *Robin Gross
> *Sent:* Monday, August 3, 2015 5:06 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* [NCSG-Discuss] CCWG Accountability Report is Now Out
>
> The CCWG-Accountability report is out:
>
> http://bit.ly/1IUzwJB <http://t.co/5nYZyX5nII>
>
> One important and positive recommendation is the report is that ICANN
> include a commitment to human rights in its bylaws.  But there's a lot
> of other significant changes in there, so please read the report.
>
> NCSG will have a webinar on 5 August to go over this report and have any
> discussion on it participants want.
>
> The comment period is now for 40 days.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Robin
>