Hi Rafik,

Presumably this will be taken up in the next round, so I'd like to ask
to be added to the ad-hoc group please.

Thanks, and best regards,
Tamir

On 9/10/2015 10:44 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> Rafik
>
> These are great comments, but since DIDP is Workstream 2 I don’t think
> it should be included in this round.
>
> This is the final or next-to-final CCWG WS 1 proposal we are
> commenting on, and we are trying to emphasize some critical aspects of
> WS1 Proposal that need to be changed. I think it detracts from that a
> bit to raise DIDP unless there is some decision that will be taken
> regarding DIDP in this round.
>
>  
>
> --MM
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From:*Rafik Dammak [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:13 PM
> *To:* Mueller, Milton L
> *Cc:* [log in to unmask]; Michael Karanicolas
> *Subject:* Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Last CCWG comments last call
>
>  
>
> Hi Milton,
>
>  
>
> thanks for solving the HR language .
>
> On other hand, there is a proposal about DIDP from Michael Karanicolas
> ,to be added to our comment, since we would like to work on that in
> workstream2 and we are having an ad-hoc group of NCSG members
> interested in this topic.
>
>  
>
> the proposal is attached. comments and edits are welcome.
>
>  
>
> Best,
>
>  
>
> Rafik
>
>  
>
> 2015-09-08 11:28 GMT+09:00 Mueller, Milton L
> <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>:
>
>     OK, I have made some minor modifications based on these
>     discussions, the only significant one related to human rights. The
>     new language reads:
>
>      
>
>     The CCWG solicits comments on two different ways of formulating
>     ICANN’s commitment to human rights. Option one expressed ICANN’s
>     commitment “to respect the fundamental human rights of the
>     exercise of free expression and the free flow of information.”
>     Option 2 expressed ICANN’s commitment more broadly, “Within its
>     mission and in its operations, ICANN will be committed to respect
>     internationally recognized fundamental human rights.”
>
>      
>
>     With one member organization exception, NCSG tends toward support
>     for the second, more general formulation. The first formulation is
>     too limited because other human rights, such as privacy, are
>     relevant to ICANN policies. We do, however, recognize that a
>     generic reference to human rights might not work as effectively as
>     more specific requirements, and that freedom of expression and
>     privacy are two human rights most directly relevant to ICANN’s
>     policy activity. Our preference, therefore, would be to formulate
>     the commitment this way:
>
>
>     “Within its mission and in its operations, ICANN will be committed
>     to respect internationally recognized fundamental human rights, in
>     particular freedom of expression and privacy.”
>
>      
>
>     I hope the policy committee can approve the whole document and get
>     it submitted to the CCWG public comment period tomorrow.
>
>      
>
>     --MM
>
>      
>
>     *From:*NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>] *On Behalf Of *William Drake
>     *Sent:* Monday, September 7, 2015 7:35 AM
>     *To:* [log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>     *Subject:* Re: [NCSG-Discuss] CCWG comments last call
>
>      
>
>      
>
>         On Sep 7, 2015, at 11:22 AM, Tapani Tarvainen
>         <[log in to unmask]
>         <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>          
>
>         compromise phrasing like "... human rights, in particular
>         freedom of expression and privacy" might work.
>
>      
>
>     Works for me, per the F2F discussions with other stakeholders
>     since summer 2014.
>
>      
>
>     Bill
>
>  
>