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 >