[lac-discuss-en] Second Preliminary Proposal CCWG on Liability

[vanda at scartezini.org]

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

 Subject: Re: Second Preliminary Proposal CCWG on Liability 
 From: vanda at scartezini.org

 Thanks Alberto! 
 Vanda Scartezini 
 Polo Consultores Associados 
 Av. Paulista 1159, 1004 cj 
 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil 
 Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 
 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 
 Sorry for any typos. 


 From: &quot;lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> &quot;On Behalf Of Alberto Soto 
 Date: Friday, August 21, 2015 at 23:59 
 To: &quot;lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org> &quot; 
 Subject: [lac-discuss-en] Second Preliminary Proposal CCWG on Liability 


 Dear, do not wait for the first webinar and somehow start the treatment of the issues that interest us. 
 You can see complete this Second Preliminary Proposal CCWG Liability in the following links: 


 https://goo.gl/utyl6E 
 https://goo.gl/KVg4pw 
 https://goo.gl/efH8mM 
 https://goo.gl/ZHjT1k 




 Suggest to address the issues, consider the paragraph number. And in the beginning I suggest the 154: 


 ADVICE AND LEADERSHIP PRIVATE SECTOR CONTRARY TO THE STATUTES 
 154 Several commentators governments strongly objected to the proposed 11 change existing Core Value, which states that the ICANN &quot;retaining its roots in the private sector&quot; should &quot;recognize that governments and public authorities are responsible for public policy&quot; and should have into account the recommendations of such authorities. After extensive discussion, the CCWG on Liability intends to address these concerns in two ways: ï‚· First, to eliminate confusion about the meaning of &quot;private sector&quot; in the ICANN Bylaws, we propose explicitly determine that the private sector includes commercial stakeholders, civil society, technical community and the academic sector.Note: A minority suggests that the meaning of &quot;private sector&quot; should be included in the description of the term, however, commercial suppliers, business users, individual end-users, civil society, academia and the technical community. ï‚· Second, we propose to delete text
  that some commentators read to remove the obligation of ICANN to request the GAC consensus advice. Instead, we propose to amend Article XI of the Statutes as follows: each consultant should inform the advisory committee, with references to international or national law applicable and relevant, as appropriate. The proposed text also implements the recommendation ATRT2 that requires ICANN to work with the GAC to facilitate the development and publication of the basis of the advice of the GAC at the time of delivery. ï‚· Third, we propose to clarify that the independent review process applies to all violations of the Articles of ICANN, including violations resulting from the action or inaction of ICANN from the contribution of advisory committees or organizations support for.


 ALAC opinion on this paragraph is as follows (in English): 


 Paragraph 154, Bullet 2: The ALAC Strongly supports the minority position That Should be end-users Explicitly referenced. Organizations user, Although many can be classed as civil society, That is not true in the case overall. [Need additional rationale demonstrating Where the two cases are different]. 


 I suggest that after skimming the index of this document, propose topics by paragraph number, to continue his treatment in the list, and subsequent placement of comments on the wiki. 


 Best regards 


 Alberto Soto 




 ________________________________ 
 [Avast logo] &lt;  https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 


 Avast antivirus software scanned this email for viruses. 
 www.avast.com &lt;  https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 







[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/b704ff9c3f.html
--]]