[council] GAC Communique response

[Marie Pattullo]

Thanks to all the drafters for your work on this!

The BC proposes the following amendment to point 1(iv):

iv) Any technical solutions need to be designed so that they take into consideration the policies they need to handle. While some may argue that systems are “flexible” enough to allow for a broad variety of policies, one such policy which is critical, and which should be a policy output from Phase 2 of the EPDP, is that the system must incorporate well-understood, current state-of-the-art “privacy by design” principles for online systems. The Council trusts that it will be fully informed of, and implicated where appropriate in, the scoping and execution of any parallel technical effort to define such a policy.
that is not the same as “privacy by design” which is probably what is called for. Due to the nature of ICANN’s PDP processes, it may be premature to attempt to launch parallel work on this.

Thanks again,

Marie






-----Original Message-----
From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Johan Helsingius
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2019 6:51 PM
To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] GAC Communique response



The suggested GNSO Council response to the GAC Communique attached.

Google docs version at:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WODNWffxy_dn6WRXV-_mJAwPhlh5V57T3L94BwQEtTE



                Julf


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20190416/b9b7ea39/attachment.html>