[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] MP3 PPSAI WG - Tuesday 6 October 2015 at 14:00 UTC

Thu Oct 8 14:47:50 UTC 2015

> Dear All, 
> 
> Please find the MP3 recording for the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation
> Issues PDP Working group call held on Tuesday 6 October 2015 at 14:00 UTC at:
> 
> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-06oct15-en.mp3
> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-29sep15-en.mp3>
> 
> On page: 
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#oct
> <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#sep>
>  
> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master
> Calendar page:
> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/
>  
>  Attendees: 
> Alex Deacon - IPC
> Carlton Samuels - AtLarge
> Chris Pelling - RrSG
> Christian Dawson - ISPCP
> Darcy Southwell  RrSG
> Don Blumenthal-RySG
> Frank Michlick - Individual
> Graeme Bunton - RrSG
> Griffin Barnett - IPC
> Iranga Kahangama
> James Bladel - RrSG
> Kathy Kleiman - NCSG
> Lindsay Hamilton-Reid - RrSG
> Osvaldo Novoa  ISPCP
> Paul McGrady - IPC
> Phil Corwin  BC
> Rudi Vansnick  NPOC
> Sara Bockey - RrSG
> Stephanie Perrin  NCSG
> Steve Metalitz  IPC
> Susan Kawaguchi - BC
> Theo Gurts - RrSG
> Todd Williams - IPC
> Val Sherman - IPC
> Vicky Sheckler
> Volker Greimann - RrSG
> 
> 
> Apologies:
> Sarah Wyld  RrSG
> Holly Raiche - ALAC
> Kiran Malancharuvil  IPC
> 
> 
> ICANN staff:
> Glen de St Gery
> Mary Wong
> Marika Konings
> Amy Bivins
> Gisella Gruber
> Chantelle Doerksen
> 
>  
> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
>  
> Mailing list archives:
> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/
> 
> Wiki page:
> https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg
>  
> Thank you.
> Kind regards,
>  
> Chantelle
> 
> -------------------------------
>  
>  Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 6 October 2015
> Nathalie  Peregrine: Dear all, welcome to the PPSAI WG call on the 6th October
> 2015
> Graeme Bunton: Getting some typing sounds.
> Mary Wong: Please mute your mics if not speaking, thank you!
> Chris Pelling: afternoon all
> Theo Geurts: hello all
> Carlton Samuels: Morning everybody
> Volker A. Greimann: afternoon
> Bladel: Good morning!
> Kathy: Is anyone else hearing a lot of static?
> Graeme Bunton: Not at the moment, Kathy
> Kathy: Just me...
> Chris Pelling: on the voice bridge I get static every now and then
> Volker A. Greimann: Re: the disclosure framework, it appears one essential
> element has been forgotten in the drafting: "No disclosure if Requestor has
> not met the requirements of disclosure, in the opinion of the provider"
> Graeme Bunton: Nothing from me, Steve.
> Mary Wong: Yes, this is the document staff received over the weekend and
> forwarded to the WG on Sunday.
> Volker A. Greimann: would today be the right time to raise that?
> Mary Wong: @Volker, we may get to that document later - but LMK if that is a
> provision that got edited out somewhere?
> Graeme Bunton: We should hopefully get there as part of item 4 on today's
> agenda i think.
> Chris Pelling: ill be leaving at 1700 at Dublin
> Chris Pelling: just an fyi
> Volker A. Greimann: @Mary: no, it was not discussed, it was simply forgotten
> Todd Williams: @Volker: doesn't III(C)(iii) cover what you're describing?
> Happy to discuss when we get to it.
> Volker A. Greimann: indeed.
> Volker A. Greimann: lets do it then
> Mary Wong: The document is unsync'ed so everyone can scroll as wished.
> Christian Dawson: Sorry for late arrival.
> Vicky Sheckler: kathy - as Paul mentioned, the subteam has not had a chance to
> review together an dthese are issues, not firm firm recommendations
> Mary Wong: Note that while ICANN may be able to collect the anecdotal data
> noted here, we won't be able to verify the data or the senders.
> Stephanie Perrin: You are fading out Steve
> Volker A. Greimann: Steve, you alternate between normal voice and baraly
> audible voice
> Val S.: I hear him fine
> Chantelle Doerksen: Iranga Kahangama, Lindsey Hamilton-Reid, and Christian
> Dawson have joined us.
> Mary Wong: Note #2: The WG can agree to recommend a periodic review, but the
> details of when, how etc will likely be worked out by the Implementation Reiew
> Team.
> Chantelle Doerksen: Osvaldo Novoa has joined.
> Chantelle Doerksen: Stephanie Perrin has joined.
> Stephanie Perrin: I dont see that determining data retention periods by
> jurisdiction is that ambitious.
> Stephanie Perrin: (for instance)
> Stephanie Perrin: The isssue of penalties is extremely important, otherwise
> there are no repercussions for requestors.
> Bladel: Concerned that we may be creating a loophole, rogue privacy services
> will restructure as legal advisors in friendly jurisdictions.
> Chris Pelling: I do not agree with the speaker here
> Stephanie Perrin: +1 James B
> Chris Pelling: you are suggesting that they simply can get around this.
> Chris Pelling: Yet you wish to remove the human rights of the PP service user
> Chris Pelling: come on......
> Stephanie Perrin: Nobody is taking away the right to counsel, we are simply
> expecting Attorneys to meet the same standards as everyone else.
> Chris Pelling: the way forward is they are treated the same
> Chris Pelling: they have to be accredited
> Chris Pelling: if we have to be accredited
> Carlton Samuels: @Stephanie: I can't speak for the entire EWG but some of us
> learned a few things that were just not in our experience, knowledge or on our
> radar.
> Chris Pelling: +1 Volker
> Mary Wong: On the type of vulnerabilities and difficult cases (e.g. asylum) -
> note that the comments on this point were largely from individuals and groups
> who were concerned about losing the ability to use P/P services.
> Mary Wong: So to the extent that the WG's final recommendations do not
> accomplish that (e.g. robust safeguards against overbroad disclosure) perhaps
> that is a starting point to resolve the topic?
> Carlton Samuels: @Volker: +1 I support one set of rules for accessing the
> service. And the rules must be applied in a non-discriminatory way
> Stephanie Perrin: This is the poor man's legal service.
> Carlton Samuels: ..and with malice towards non!
> Mary Wong: Hopefully my comments help clarify where the concerns (which in the
> document are reflected as "according to staff") came from. The review we did
> include all the additional comments that the Save Domain Privacy petition
> organizers sent in as well.
> Stephanie Perrin: We cannot create a species of privacy proxy service provider
> that does not have the same requirements to reveal as the non-lawyer variety.
> Carlton Samuels: If we think the rules can be mute in malice, we must give it
> voice to protect all those who need the service.
> Volker A. Greimann: maybe the solution is not to let lawyers provide this
> service, i.e. make certain that the rules cover layers when talking about
> unaccredited service providers
> Kathy: some in the world think we should not move forward - and passionately
> so
> Volker A. Greimann: that would solve the issue of two sets of rules. just ban
> them from providing thi non-legal service unless they agree to follow the
> rules
> Volker A. Greimann: they can still recommend service providers to their
> customers
> Philip Corwin: Volker, I think ICANN lacks any power to prevent attorneys from
> providing such services to their clients. It's not like they need to be
> accredited
> Volker A. Greimann: right, but it can force registrars to suspend such
> registrations under their terms
> Volker A. Greimann: lawyers=unaccredited service provider= trigger for
> registrar enforcement of consequences
> Volker A. Greimann: "you used a lawyer to hide your identity from the whois?
> He is not accredited? Sorry, under ICANN policies, which you accepted, we must
> now suspend the domain...
> Mary Wong: @Steve, from the ICANN perspective, we do not believe either the WG
> or ICANN can deem any law applicable.
> Mary Wong: This is not to say we don't agree that this is an important
> concern, just that we do not believe we have the legal authority to do so.
> Volker A. Greimann: @Mary: something similar to the choice of law requirements
> of the UDRP may work
> Volker A. Greimann: i.e. those who avail themselves of a defined process must
> agree to certain jurisdictions¥
> Mary Wong: @Volker, possibly - but even there it's not a single jurisdiction
> that is mandated.
> Bladel: Just thankst o Subteam 4.
> Mary Wong: And this may be a bit more complicated because there isn't just one
> single contract involved.
> Don Blumenthal: I think that jurisdiction is beyond our scope . However, I'll
> mention that LE is not the only possible source of legal paperwork.
> Mary Wong: @Steve, noted.
> Mary Wong: This is the version circulated but including Stephanie's comments
> from yesterday.
> Kathy: Steve - I think people might need to review
> Kathy: Tx to Todd for our work together on this version
> Philip Corwin: I must drop off to join SO/AC leader call. See you all in
> Dublin -- safe travel!
> Rudi Vansnick: have to go too ... SO/AC call
> Volker A. Greimann: correct Steve, thanks
> Volker A. Greimann: that is what i think as well, it just should be clearer
> Kathy: A bit more clarity might be good...
> Carlton Samuels: Thanks everbody
> Frank Michlick: See you in Dublin. Thank you.
> Bladel: Thanks, folks.  Safe travels.
> Sara Bockey: thanks all
> Carlton Samuels: Safe travels to Dublin
> Graeme Bunton: Thanks all
> Chantelle Doerksen: Thanks all! Safe travels to Dublin!


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20151008/37fd0d4e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4615 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20151008/37fd0d4e/smime-0001.p7s>