[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Proposed language concerning lawyers and P/P services

[Carlton Samuels]

+1.

It is the service being provisioned. We care not a whit if you're Atilla
the Hun or Joe Q Said, lately of Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.

If you provide the service the rules, must equally protect and be
aggressively agnostic to form, look or feel of the provider.

-Carlton


==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
*Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
=============================

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:

> I don't find this wording acceptable.  Firstly, we had several rounds of
> discussion on this in the Working group, it sounds in this formulation as
> if it had not come up in the working group.
> Secondly, we are not proposing that ICANN regulate attorney client
> relationships.  Are we not regulating Privacy Proxy service providers?  If
> lawyers are P/P providers, I see no reason to exempt them.  Thirdly, the
> issue of whether lawyers will become the major tool for criminals to escape
> (or delay significantly, almost as good) revelation of their identities is
> huge and is well within our remit to discuss.  If indeed having a special
> class of unregulated PP providers does indeed drive traffic to the lawyers
> it makes our efforts somewhat in vain.  I will leave it to the PP providers
> present to make the argument about unfair competition.
> Cheers Stephanie
>
>
> On 2015-10-19 11:33, Mary Wong wrote:
>
> Dear WG members,
> As you’ll recall, at our face to face meeting on Friday, the WG discussed
> whether there is a need to clarify whether the WG”s proposed definition
> of P/P services includes, or should expressly exclude, lawyers and
> attorneys who, as service providers, do proxy service registrations for
> clients in light of concerns over the impact on the right to counsel. The
> co-chairs would like to offer the following language for your further
> discussion:
>
> "The issue of whether or not accreditation standards would apply to
> attorneys was raised in public comments.  However, we believe it is outside
> of ICANN’s remit to regulate attorney/client relationships and we believe
> that ICANN should avoid attempting to do so in any implementation of our
> proposed policy.”
>
> Please feel free to continue the discussion via email to this list.
>
> Thanks and cheers
> Mary
>
> Mary Wong
> Senior Policy Director
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
> Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
> Email: mary.wong at icann.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing listGnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20151020/5fdd1d6f/attachment.html>