<div dir="ltr"><div>I think we need to be cognisant of the current status quo and use that as the basis for our thoughts on the matter:</div><div><br></div><div>1) There is no differentiation between legal or natural contacts.</div><div>2) The redaction of all contacts is permitted and has become the de-facto standard.</div><div>3) We allow consent-based disclosure. <br></div><div>4) NIS 2 may at some point in the future require publication of non-personal information.</div><div><br></div><div>This leads to two very simple follow-on questions:</div><div>a) How do we identify such non-personal information? What is really necessary for this end?<br></div><div>b) What would publication entail?</div><div><br></div><div>For a) we and Twobirds identified voluntary self-declaration of the data submitted. As all data is redacted by default, the differentiation of the data subject category is irrelevant as it ultimately only boils down to the declaration of the data subject thatthe data contains no personal information. <br></div><div><br></div><div>For b), the term "publish" is undefined. For all we know, it could mean publication in a physical print edition (it doesn't mean that though). But publication within SSAD can very well be sufficient for that definition. There is no reason whatsoever to assume differently. <br></div><div><br></div><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><span lang="EN-US">-- <br>Volker A. Greimann<br>General Counsel and Policy Manager<br><b>KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH</b><br><br>T: +49 6894 9396901<br>M: +49 6894 9396851<br>F: +49 6894 9396851<br>W: </span><a href="http://www.key-systems.net/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">www.key-systems.net</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><br><br>Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local court of Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no. HR B 18835<br>CEO: Oliver Fries and Robert Birkner<br><br>Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company registered in England and Wales with company number 8576358.<br><br></span><span style="font-family:Roboto,sans-serif;font-size:14px;white-space:pre-wrap;background-color:rgb(248,249,250)">This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended only for the person(s) directly addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, transmission, distribution, or other forms of dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete this email with any files that may be attached.</span></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top:1px solid #d3d4de">
<tr>
<td style="width:55px;padding-top:13px"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"></a></td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virus-free. <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" target="_blank" style="color:#4453ea">www.avast.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</table><a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"></a></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 1:52 PM Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Gnso-epdp-team <<a href="mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org">gnso-epdp-team@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div class="gmail-m_2699522058255789439WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Dear Milton,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Thank you for your constructive thoughts. I believe we have a lot to build on. In relation to principle one, I think we all agree that some legal data subjects
would want to publish their data in the RDDS, but without your first principle they can only do this through consent. The legal memo received lately from Bird & Bird explains that if CPs publish the data of legal persons based on consent they are at a higher
risk than if they publish the data of legal persons based on self-designation. In the latter case CPs might only be liable if they fail to address a complaint. So the question always was: what is the benefit of labeling the data as belonging to a natural or
legal person? Of course we all know that GDPR protects the data of natural persons and not legal persons, but the important answer now is that the distinction significantly reduces the liability of CPs. In addition, the distinction is helpful in performing
the balancing test in case the data is not published and I am sure if we look into individual use cases we can find much more benefits. Moreover, it could prove to be useful regarding possible upcoming regulations. I would also add that the level of protection
assigned to the data elements suggested by Steve provides additional safe guards and flexibility in the implementation.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Finally, I join you in being optimistic about our ability to finish this.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Kind regards<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Hadia
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentcolor currentcolor;border-style:solid none none;border-width:1pt medium medium;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Gnso-epdp-team [mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mueller, Milton L via Gnso-epdp-team<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, April 14, 2021 10:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-epdp-team@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] On the proposed guidance<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Colleagues:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">I have only gotten time to review the latest Guidance document and the surrounding debate today. Apologies, but there is a lot going on in my day job.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">I am disappointed to see that we seem to be going backwards. I see divergence rather than convergence on the way we are approaching the problem.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">I see no point in adding more noise to the current document via the Comments function. What I would like to try to do is articulate some broad principles about
how to deal with the legal/natural distinction. If we can agree on those principles, it will be relatively easy to complete the document. If we cannot/do not agree on those principles, additional wordsmithing and debates over terms will not get us anywhere.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">So here are the broad principles that I would offer up for debate:
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m_2699522058255789439MsoListParagraph"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">1.</span><span style="font-size:7pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">The legal/natural distinction is relevant and we need to find a way make it in RDDS without compromising privacy rights.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m_2699522058255789439MsoListParagraph"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">2.</span><span style="font-size:7pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Registrants should be able to self-designate as legal or natural, with no burden of authentication placed on registrars or registries<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m_2699522058255789439MsoListParagraph"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">3.</span><span style="font-size:7pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">To protect small home offices or NGOs who are technically Legal persons but whose registration data may include Personal data, we need an additional check in the process.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m_2699522058255789439MsoListParagraph"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">4.</span><span style="font-size:7pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">As long as they conform with the above 3 principles, registrars/ries (CPs) should be given maximum flexibility to choose the way to differentiate.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Principle 1 discussion:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">If we cannot agree on this (or agree to abandon this principle), _<i>nothing else will fall into place</i>_. Ever. So let’s settle that. Steve and Volker I
suspect will disagree with this principle. Steve has argued that the L/N distinction is “not a central concern” and all that matters is whether the registrant’s data is to be made available to anyone. If he is right, we can discard the guidance altogether,
because we already have a recommendation to allow the RNH to consent to the publication of their data. Volker has also suggested that it is personal data we need to differentiate, not L/N . I disagree with Steve and Volker on this and so do most of the rest
of the group. L/N distinction is a central concern to certain stakeholder groups in the EPDP, because a) GDPR and other data protection laws do not protect it and this process is all about bringing RDS into compliance with privacy law; b) Legal person data
could be published and it would provide easier access to their registration data. As a NCSG member I can find no basis for objecting to the publication of WalMart’s, Kroger’s or the local hardware store’s registration data. Any concerns about PII are addressed
by principles 2 and 3. Steve is approaching this as an engineer, but this is a policy process, and we will not obtain agreement on a solution unless certain stakeholders are satisfied. If they think it is a central concern, it’s a central concern, that’s how
policy/politics work.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Principle 2 discussion<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">This is the key principle that keeps NCSG and CPH satisfied. Registrants are in control of how they are designated. Yes, this means that some people will lie.
That is just something we will have to accept. One cannot erase that possibility without creating a system that is too burdensome and costly as to outweigh any benefits.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Principle 3 discussion<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">This is something everyone seems to agree on already. But it is good to make it explicit, then we can work out how specific our guidance can get, so as to conform
to …<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Principle 4<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Avoid being overly prescriptive, but ensure that the other 3 principles are honored. So yes, Volker, we give you maximum flexibility to implement in accordance
with different business models, but you can NOT make a designation for a RNH, because it violates principle 2.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">I truly believe that if we can come to agreement on these 4 principles and use them as the basis for drafting guidance, we can actually finish this.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-epdp-team mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote></div><div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top:1px solid #d3d4de">
<tr>
<td style="width:55px;padding-top:13px"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"></a></td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virus-free. <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" target="_blank" style="color:#4453ea">www.avast.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</table><a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"></a></div>