Zoom chat: 2024-02-07 At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG)

12:57:05 From Ashrafur Rahman Piaus  to Everyone:
    Hi Everyone
12:57:21 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    g'day from Aus
12:58:03 From Ashrafur Rahman Piaus  to Everyone:
    It is midnight in Bangladesh ( 01:00 AM)
12:58:31 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    To follow along with the RTT:  https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net]
12:58:38 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Thank you
12:59:35 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Evening, afternoon, morning all.
13:00:51 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    To follow along with the RTT:  https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net]
13:01:13 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Just on the AF DNS study the number of registrars in the region (Sep 2023 figures) was 13 with 161,517 gTLD regs. the registrants may prefer local ccTLD registrars but much of the gTLD business seem to be on non-AF region registrars.
13:05:37 From Seb Bachollet to Everyone:
    Net mundial?
13:06:21 From Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond to Everyone:
    Netmundial discussion on AOB?
13:06:31 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Ahh always room for a new acronym at ICANN!
13:07:45 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "It is midnight in Ba..."
    
    this is why the calls rotate  (0600 for me and we are in the same Region!
13:08:30 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Thank you Steinar
13:08:31 From Bill Jouris to Everyone:
    Sorry to be late
13:08:34 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    Thanks Steinar!
13:09:04 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    5th meeting?
13:09:38 From Steinar Grøtterød (At-Large) to Everyone:
    Reacted to "Ahh always room for ..." with 
13:10:01 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
    Yes, netmundial update on AOB please.
13:10:08 From Am Joly Bachollet to Everyone:
    Yes on behalf of Sebastien
13:10:16 From Gopal Tadepalli to Everyone:
    Greetings. - Dr. T V Gopal, Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, College of Engineering, Guindy Campus, Anna University , Chennai, INDIA.
13:14:45 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to ALAC-Justine Chew(Direct Message):
    Hi Justine, what slide do you want me to start at?
13:15:05 From ALAC-Shah Rahman to Everyone:
    @Carlton SAMUELS   maybe   there will  be KPI as well to measure SLA
13:15:37 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Applicant Support Handbook (ASP)   yes runs to after ICANN79
13:15:49 From ALAC-Shah Rahman to Everyone:
    Reacted to "Applicant Support Ha..." with 
13:16:11 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "Applicant Support Ha..."
    
    AN important issue for many in at large so CPWG
13:20:18 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    The new contract amendments present that possibility as well
13:22:47 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    To follow along with the RTT:  https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net]
13:25:04 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    Replying to "@Carlton SAMUELS   m..."
    
    Actually they are included; one example: time to respond to a request.  And that is monitored very closely and recorded.
13:25:48 From ALAC-Shah Rahman to Everyone:
    Reacted to "Actually they are in..." with 
13:29:54 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    The .PARS was an interesting example. It never seems to haver launched.
13:30:23 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    "shortcomings of their absolutist positions"  I LOVE that @Michael Palage I am going to steal that one to use  be warned...
13:33:00 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Wise words @Michael Palage +++ Thank You for this important and balanced perspective...
13:33:52 From Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond to Everyone:
    IMHO this "no content" thing is a red herring.
13:34:06 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Specific content covered by legislation. That's the limitation?
13:34:10 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "IMHO this "no conten..."
    
    YUP a convenient and often stinky one
13:35:11 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
    Reacted to IMHO this "no conten... with "
13:36:11 From Michael Palage to Everyone:
    content may be a "collateral" issue
13:36:41 From Michael Palage to Everyone:
    https://domainincite.com/29459-no-excuses-pir-to-pay-for-all-registries-to-tackle-child-abuse
13:37:00 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Replying to "content may be a "co..."
    
    Content covered by legislation provides a cover for ICANN and gets around the tricky ICANN content regulation issue.
13:37:01 From avri doria to Everyone:
    Isn't anti CSAM diligence motivated mostly by law?  Even we admit that law, trumps bylaws.
13:37:06 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    @Michael Palage Regarding whether the community through ICANN has standing to intervene in that PIR sale, I can tell you prevailing position is the RA is a contract and consensus policy. So community standing to challenge via specific representations is moot.
13:37:24 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Hadia  '...clarify its contract and enforcing...'  is not necessarily  moderating  as in @Michael Palage's  "threading the needle" intervention AND  Bylaws can change  so let's make that point in our explanation of the choice we recommend which for me  IS  c YES
13:38:34 From avri doria to Everyone:
    as for whether with the changed mission, UDRP has moved into the grey area, it that something the review of UDRP will look at?
13:38:34 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    I also hear you @hadia Elminiawi for your b. NO choice  BUT the Board is VERY risk adverse
13:39:30 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    Did anyone read the Namecheap pleading in Namecheap v ICANN in the California Superior Court?
13:40:07 From avri doria to Everyone:
    no reason the community cannot push the board to be less risk adverse. if that is what it really wants. but that is a different issue.
13:40:16 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    The Bylaw change if required needs to be in relation to enforcing contracts, but to change the Bylaws to include content for me would be a big no, because we don’t want ICANN to be regarded as a content moderator
13:40:16 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Perhaps hace the RO explain and detail how it will enforce any commitments.
13:40:25 From Michael Palage to Everyone:
    @Carlton wrt the PIR sale - I initially agreed with your position. However, there was a noted change once the California AG weighed in based on their direct oversight of ICANN as an California non profit.
13:40:45 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "Perhaps hace the RO ..."
    
    that's a Sure  from me @John McCormac - HosterStats.com
13:41:45 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Can we frame a response to these questions based on that approach @ALAC-Jonathan Zuck??
13:41:53 From ALAC-Shah Rahman to Everyone:
    Replying to "The Bylaw change if ..."
    
    not the fundamental changes of by laws but some language maybe
13:42:05 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    @ALAC-Jonathan Zuck Yes, re RVC in RAs and RAAs, the At-Large position is if its there then IC must enforce compliance. The response has always been 'go fly a kite'.
13:42:06 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Enforcing contracts, PICs and RVCs is what is required but changing bylaws to clearly mention content would make ICANN a content moderator
13:42:08 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    Replying to "Can we frame a respo..."
    
    I believe we easily can.
13:42:17 From Michael Palage to Everyone:
    @Carlton please not this standard warranty appearing in Section 1.3 of the baseline registry agreement -"Registry Operator represents and warrants to ICANN as follows:          (i)             all material information provided and statements made in the registry TLD application, and statements made in writing during the negotiation of this Agreement, were true and correct in all material respects at the time made, and such information or statements continue to be true and correct in all material respects as of the Effective Date except as otherwise previously disclosed in writing by Registry Operator to ICANN"
13:42:23 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    Exactly Justine.
13:42:31 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "Can we frame a respo..."
    
    OK  seems a worthy direction to explore then JZ
13:42:53 From Alan Greenberg (ALAC) to Everyone:
    Sorry to be late.
13:43:22 From ALAC-Bill Jouris to Everyone:
    Even if a Bylaws change isn't *required*, it would be useful to make the situation regarding our remit absolutely clear.
13:44:03 From Natalia Filina to Everyone:
    Reacted to "The Bylaw change if ..." with 
13:44:11 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    +1 Jonathan
13:44:19 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "Even if a Bylaws cha..."
    
    That's where I am sitting still @ALAC-Bill Jouris, but  let's see what the b. No but.. approach can get to by the rationale JZ is outlining perhaps  I am open at least
13:44:29 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    ICANN Compliance hasn't the resources or expertise to deal with content issues across what could be hundreds if not thousands of gTLDs. This needs a bit more thought.
13:44:36 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    @Michael Palage Yessir, very familiar with it. If you go back thru the archives you will see the arguments.  Myself and Evan Leibovitch have always been in the forefront with this argument.
13:44:56 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    I thought there was time
13:45:20 From ALAC-Bill Jouris to Everyone:
    Replying to "Even if a Bylaws cha..."
    
    I suppose it's a tradeoff between speed and clarity....
13:46:08 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "Even if a Bylaws cha..."
    
    @ALAC-Bill Jouris or risk management//mitigation
13:46:29 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    Yes, that's the 3rd party participation and audit or whatever that results in information that can be objectively used by compliance
13:46:41 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Reacted to "Yes, that's the 3rd ..." with 
13:47:09 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    Btw, Been following the Namecheap brouhaha re removal of prince controls IRP. Did anyone see the pleadings in Namecheap vs, ICANN in the California Superior Court?
13:47:14 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    we might be overcomplicating this
13:47:39 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    +1 Michael
13:47:52 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "Yes, that's the 3rd ..."
    
    OK  but there needs to be teeth for compliance to do that and that has to be clear in its base
13:48:45 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    "WHEREFORE, Petitioner Namecheap, Inc. prays for judgment against Respondent ICANN as follows:     1. Confirmation of the Final Declaration of the IRP Panel;     2. Mandatory injunctive relief to comply with the directives and recommendations of the IRP Panel in the form of the Proposed Judgment attached hereto as Exhibit B;     3. Attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in bringing this Petition; and     4. Any such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper
13:50:19 From Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond to Everyone:
    nobody else can enforce ICANN contracts but ICANN
13:50:30 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    I don't think CC an delegate actual contract enforcement
13:50:53 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    For me we need to encourage something that ICANN  and ICANN Compliance will feel  as strong as possible in its risks associated with any action or decision to act in all this...   let's see what we can draft on the "needle threading" as @Michael Palage puts it then?? and as @ALAC-Jonathan Zuck was envisioning  ...
13:51:03 From Am Joly Bachollet to Everyone:
    Replying to "IMHO this "no conten…"
    Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuiooooooooooouu
13:51:07 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
    Delegated authority????
13:51:28 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    Replying to "IMHO this "no conten..."
    
    +1
13:52:24 From avri doria to Everyone:
    delegating authority does not remove responsibility and accountability action.
13:52:36 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Reacted to "delegating authority..." with 
13:52:56 From ALAC-Justine Chew to Everyone:
    I think Greg volunteered for the NCAP Study 2 comment
13:53:24 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    Replying to "I think Greg volunte..."
    
    I also volunteered here
13:53:36 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Would delegating authority require some altertation to the contracts as the parties (ICANN and RO) would have to agree?
13:55:34 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    @John McCormac - HosterStats.com contract law - even in common law jurisdictions - say must be a party to the contract to have standing for enforcement. So the third party would have to be designated an agent by both parties.
13:56:42 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    surely the IANA one is just a supportive feedback
13:56:44 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Replying to "@John McCormac - Hos..."
    
    Yes. It looked a bit odd for ICANN being able to delegate authority like that without the RO consenting.
13:56:56 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    We need to add the upcoming Applicant Support Handbook PC opening start of next week and we SHOULD do something on that perhaps at ICANN79  Justine and I probably get that drafting role as we served in the IRT - ASP actively
13:59:03 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Reacted to "We need to add the u..." with 
13:59:59 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
    It is a way out of ICANN's content dilemma. If a Registry volunteers content related and other extra-remit committments, just as there might be a semblance of a process to engage a third party observer, another process skin to this third party process may be roughly devised to "delegate" or sort of delegate some form of enforcement
    
    some form o
    f "Authority" to a suitable third party / external community
14:00:31 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    The string similarity review public comment closes after ICANN79 meeting - 27 March so we have time
14:00:54 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
    This is all new, so the definition of evenbthe description is preliminary
14:01:51 From avri doria to Everyone:
    and the ASP Guidebook is replete with judgement calls. I thknk they mostly chose well, but opinions may vary.
14:03:26 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    a "feedback campaign!"
14:03:53 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    +1 Alan
14:03:56 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Reacted to "a "feedback campaign..." with 
14:04:03 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Reacted to "+1 Alan" with 
14:04:09 From ALAC-Justine Chew to Everyone:
    I am thinking of conducting a webinar on the Draft ASP Handbook at some point.
14:04:26 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "I am thinking of con..."
    
    absolutely
14:05:20 From Ashrafur Rahman Piaus  to Everyone:
    +1 Avri
14:05:34 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "and the ASP Guideboo..."
    
    exactly why we need broader input (if it exists)
14:06:03 From Ashrafur Rahman Piaus  to Everyone:
    Replying to "I am thinking of con..." 
    
     Perfect
14:06:34 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Yup all signed up for that @Andrew Chen - ICANN Org
14:07:05 From Betty Fausta to Everyone:
    Reacted to We need to add the u... with "
14:07:11 From Andrew Chen - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    Reacted to "Yup all signed up fo..." with 
14:08:19 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    +1 Justine Mathias would arrange for someone from the NCAP study group to present this to us
14:08:21 From Chokri Ben Romdhane to Everyone:
    Thank you all fir the great call
14:13:53 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    At least for now!
14:15:18 From Louis Houle to Everyone:
    .Québec? it’s a work in progress!
14:16:01 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Yes this shift from the SubPro Implementation Guidance is rather important to note.
14:17:10 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    a Rec should trump IG  IMO
14:17:36 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    That we need to support  so that the value and weight of the SubPro IG is clearly overwritten BY the Rec
14:17:56 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    SUb Pro CAN NIT do that!
14:17:58 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    NOT
14:18:26 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Sub Pro is done deal
14:18:46 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Rec should overrule IG
14:20:06 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    @ALAC-Justine Chew "if you have little chance...why bother?" Wisdom is the principal thing indeed!!
14:21:28 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Okay
14:21:57 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    In all cases the comment does not harm
14:22:54 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    +1 Cheryl
14:23:02 From ALAC-Justine Chew to Everyone:
    This "contradiction" was discussed at the SubPro IRT and acknowledged as an issue.
14:23:24 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Replying to "In all cases the com..."
    
    exactly  but the anomaly may do if not noted
14:23:39 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to CART | A LaCARTe - Kara Valor(Direct Message):
    Hi Kara - are you able to stay 5 minutes over today?  Thinking they are going to go over the allotted time.
14:25:25 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Thank you Jonathan
14:25:51 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    link to the TP doc?
14:26:02 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/11u--2SsDZsVtg8F4GEx9SCO8EETVTvDQ9H8TJUa5gA8/edit#heading=h.i7cexvtlv8m4
14:26:09 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Reacted to "https://docs.google...." with 
14:26:13 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    @Andrew Chen - ICANN Org thank you for the document
14:26:18 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Reacted to "https://docs.google...." with 
14:26:38 From Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    These talking points will be reviewed during the Welcome Session on Day 1 of ICANN79.
14:26:55 From Steinar Grøtterød (At-Large) to Everyone:
    Do we know when the policy session will take place?
14:26:57 From Michael Palage to Everyone:
    need to drop
14:27:16 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Reacted to "Do we know when the ..." with 
14:27:25 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Removed a  reaction from "Do we know when the ..."
14:27:32 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Not TOO extensive though
14:27:33 From Lavish Mawuena Mensah to Everyone:
    Reacted to https://docs.google.... with "
14:27:33 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Reacted to "These talking points..." with 
14:27:42 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    KISS still counts
14:32:35 From Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    There will be an At-Large session on the Grant Program during ICANN79.
14:32:41 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    Wasn't the ALAC get the lockout?
14:32:49 From Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    It is not on tomorrow’s agenda of the OFB-WG.
14:33:01 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    OFB-WG meeting wiki agenda page: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/lx-xBQ
14:34:04 From Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    Steinar, the discussion on policy is Saturday afternoon
14:34:20 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    The way I read it is inre the grant program, the At-Large  is treated like ugly stepchildren, no?
14:34:30 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    @ALAC-Justine Chew my point was:how would you have a variant label that you can apply for without the RZLGR. So although you can apply for labels for scripts not included in the RZLGR, you will not be able. To apply for variants whose scripts are not included in the RZLGR because you will not be able to generate them without the RZLGR
14:34:53 From Lavish Mawuena Mensah to Everyone:
    Reacted to OFB-WG meeting wiki ... with "
14:35:03 From Steinar Grøtterød (At-Large) to Everyone:
    Replying to "Steinar, the discuss..."
    
    Excellent. Thanks
14:35:12 From Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    @Steinar Grøtterød (At-Large) - 16:15-17:30 AST (UTC-4) on Saturday.
14:35:20 From ALAC-Justine Chew to Everyone:
    Thanks all, I will try to compile the feedback on the RVCs discussion.
14:35:37 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    @ALAC-Justine Chew thank you
14:35:42 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Reacted to "Thanks all, I will t..." with 
14:35:48 From Cheryl Langdon-Orr to Everyone:
    Lots covered today Team... Good call... Thanks to all the presenters and @ALAC-Justine Chew in particular for the briefings and discussions ... Bye for now then...
14:35:50 From ALAC-Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
    Thanks everyone
14:35:52 From Carlton SAMUELS to Everyone:
    Have to run. Good meeting. Bye all. many thanks to all.
14:35:53 From Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    Next CPWG meeting: Wednesday, 14 February at 14:00 UTC
14:35:54 From Alberto Soto to Everyone:
    Thanks, bye bye!!!
14:35:56 From ALAC-Pari Esfandiari to Everyone:
    Thanks all.
14:35:58 From Mouloud Khelif to Everyone:
    Thanks everyone
14:36:00 From ALAC-Shah Rahman to Everyone:
    Thank you all
14:36:01 From Lavish Mawuena Mensah to Everyone:
    Thank you all...
14:36:02 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
    Thanks and later all.
14:36:05 From Ashrafur Rahman Piaus  to Everyone:
    Thank you all
14:36:12 From ALAC-Justine Chew to Everyone:
    Replying to "@ALAC-Justine Chew m..."
    
    Forget the variant angle, just focus on strings in scripts NOT in the RZ-LGR.
14:36:13 From Laura Margolis to Everyone:
    Great job, thank you!
14:36:22 From Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org to Everyone:
    Thanks, All.
14:36:25 From Lavish Mawuena Mensah to Everyone:
    Reacted to Next CPWG meeting: W... with "
14:37:07 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
    Thank you all bye for now
14:37:14 From Betty Fausta to Everyone:
    Thank you.
14:37:15 From Gopal Tadepalli to Everyone:
    Many thanks.
14:37:19 From Natalia Filina to Everyone:
    thank you all, bye!