[CCWG-ACCT] Redactions in ICANN documents
Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au
Fri Jul 17 09:53:27 UTC 2015
>> Until such time as ewe have community standards on redactions, I think including the contractual or other provision they are relying on for the redaction, as Samantha did in her note, is a useful measure.
Yes - I like the idea that any redaction comes with a note for the reason for the redaction.
Also I would like to be able to share more of our critical contracts - e.g. commercial agreements with parties providing legal advice, carrying our reviews, varying our evaluations on new gTLD applications, etc to be public - but with key commercials (e.g pricing model) and private information (e.g. mobile phone numbers for escalations etc) redacted . This may mean that contracts with third parties are structured so that the materials that need to be redacted are contained in schedules rather than the core agreement. A schedule can be used to contain pricing, and personal contact details etc.
There also should d be a clear mechanisms for challenging a redaction - and this might be something that could be incorporated into the Ombudsman function. Ie the Ombudsman should have access to non-redacted documents and confirm that the redactions comply with any redaction policy, or confidentiality agreements.
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community