[Gnso-rds-pdp-6] FW: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Paul Keating Paul at law.es
Tue Nov 7 12:35:27 UTC 2017 

I think these are already sufficiently  incorporated in what we have for
WG6.

Paul

From:  <gnso-rds-pdp-6-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Chuck
<consult at cgomes.com>
Date:  Monday, November 6, 2017 at 11:17 PM
To:  <gnso-rds-pdp-6 at icann.org>
Cc:  <GNSO-RDS-pdp-5 at icann.org>
Subject:  [Gnso-rds-pdp-6] FW: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

> DT6 members,
>  
> Please note that DT5 suggests that the following use cases be included in the
> DT6 (Legal Actions) deliverable instead of the Contractual Enforcement
> deliverable.  Are there any objections to me adding them?  Note that the
> Contractual Enforcement deliverable has been changed to ICANN Contractual
> Enforcement.  Please let me know if you have any concerns not later than end
> of day tomorrow (Tuesday).
>  
> Chuck
>  
> 
> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 11:38 AM
> To: 'Chuck' <consult at cgomes.com>; 'Kris Seeburn' <seeburn.k at gmail.com>
> Cc: lisa at corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings' <bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net>;
> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5 at icann.org
> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update
>  
> Chuck, per discussion just now in DT 5, here are the use cases we are
> EXCLUDING from the contractual compliance paper (now to be re-named ICANN
> Contractual Compliance), and that should be picked up as use cases in the
> Legal Actions paper:
>  
> use cases generated either by the EWG, see
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf
> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf%20%20
> > , pages 9, 24, 28), or by this WG in an earlier phase of our work, (see
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries%2
> 0for%20compliance%20purposes.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1470109106000&api
> =v2); 
>  
> and also the following developed during our deliberations:
>  
>  Using registration data to seek to ascertain the identity and location of the
> operator (or domain name registrant responsible for) a website on which A¹s
> intellectual property rights are being exercised.  For example, this could
> involve use of A¹s trademark in logos displayed on the site; offers for sale
> of merchandise bearing A¹s trademark; making available for download or
> streaming movies or sound recordings for which A holds the copyright; etc.
> This is a necessary first step to determining whether the operator (or
> registrant) is a licensee with respect to the intellectual property in
> question, and if so, whether the use of the intellectual property exceeds the
> scope of the license (e.g., because of territorial restrictions in the
> license).  Alternatively, if A determines that the operator/registrant is not
> a licensee, this is a necessary first step in seeking contractual enforcement
> of terms of service by the registrar/registry, and/or potentially ICANN
> contractual enforcement of registrar/registry obligations to investigate and
> take appropriate action.
>  
> Steve
>  
>  
> 
> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation
> T: 202.355.7902 | met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>
> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/>
> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
>  
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE
> PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY
> BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND
> CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU
> ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING
> OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY
> E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM
> YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
>  
> 
> From: Chuck [mailto:consult at cgomes.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 10:18 AM
> To: Metalitz, Steven; 'Kris Seeburn'
> Cc: lisa at corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings'; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5 at icann.org
> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update
>  
> Thanks for the very helpful feedback Steve.  My intent was not to eliminate
> any use cases but rather to differentiate between Regulatory action and
> Contractual Enforcement.  I don¹t think that third parties enforce the
> agreements, but they can and are a source that assists ICANN Contractual
> Compliance so maybe we need to word it in a way that includes that.
>  
> As I said in a different email a few days ago,  the DT5 team (Regulatory or
> Contractual Enforcement) suggested that the Regulatory & Legal Actions
> purposes could be combined into one.  How do DT5 team members feel about that?
> Note that I put that on the agenda for our call tomorrow.
>  
> I am happy to see that my edits generated discussion.  In the end the team
> needs to decide what to do, not me.
>  
> Steve ­ if you want to revise the language to deal with any of these issues, I
> think that would be very helpful before our call tomorrow.  And please do not
> feel obliged to use my edits.
>  
> Chuck
>  
> 
> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 2:33 PM
> To: 'Chuck' <consult at cgomes.com>; 'Kris Seeburn' <seeburn.k at gmail.com>
> Cc: lisa at corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings' <bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net>;
> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5 at icann.org
> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update
>  
> Chuck¹s suggested change re contractual enforcement would eliminate
> consideration of a number of use cases generated either by the EWG, see
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf
> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf%20%20
> > , pages 9, 24, 28), or by this WG in an earlier phase of our work, (see
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries%2
> 0for%20compliance%20purposes.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1470109106000&api
> =v2).  
>  
> Our earlier draft identified five examples of entities using RDS for
> contractual enforcement purposes:  ³These entities include governmental tax
> authorities, UDRP  providers,  the ICANN organization, intellectual property
> owners, and merchant account monitoring solution providers, among others.²
>  
> Chuck¹s proposed change would move the first of these to the regulatory
> enforcement category (I support that), but would eliminate the second, fourth
> and fifth examples.   It would recognize the contractual enforcement use only
> when ICANN was a party to the contract (the third example).
>  
> Chuck, if your point is that these uses fit better under ³legal actions² than
> under ³contractual enforcement,² then I would be OK with that so long as they
> are explicitly addressed under ³legal actions.²  I think they fit better under
> ³contract enforcement² because they in fact involve enforcement of contracts;
> but if the investigation supported by RDS data indicates a breach of contract,
> then the result may be a ³legal action,² i.e., a lawsuit.
>  
> I would be quite concerned however if these important uses were not captured
> either in ³contract enforcement² nor in ³legal actions.²  Maybe Chuck or Lisa
> could advise us whether that is or is not the case.
>  
>   Steve Metalitz 
>  
> 
> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation
> T: 202.355.7902 | met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>
> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/>
> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
>  
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE
> PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY
> BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND
> CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU
> ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING
> OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY
> E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM
> YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
>  
> 
> From: Chuck [mailto:consult at cgomes.com <mailto:consult at cgomes.com> ]
> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2017 10:39 AM
> To: 'Kris Seeburn'
> Cc: Metalitz, Steven; lisa at corecom.com <mailto:lisa at corecom.com> ; 'Bastiaan
> Goslings'; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5 at icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5 at icann.org>
> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update
> Importance: High
>  
> I arrived home last night and am trying to catch up.  Can someone please send
> me the latest Word versions and the links to the Google Docs for both
> deliverables?
>  
> Also, regarding the definitions, I have been thinking about them and suspect
> that some WG members will have problem with the word Œcollected¹ so I suggest
> that we consider using the word Œused¹ instead.  And for Contractual
> Enforcement I question whether we should refer to Private Party Contracts
> because ICANN Compliance does not have any enforcement ability with Private
> Party Contracts so I edited that.  They would then read as follows:
>  
> Contractual Enforcement
> Information used to enable ICANN Compliance to monitor and enforce contracted
> parties¹ agreements with ICANN, as well as resolving issues of compliance
> arising from issues raised by private parties.
>  
> Regulatory
> Information used to enable contact between the registrant and/or their
> designated point of contact and regulatory entities to ensure compliance with
> applicable laws.
>  
> Please feel free to comment on these suggested edits before our call on
> Monday.
>  
> Finally, here is a listing from the Wednesday meeting that summarizes our
> tasks:
> o    Summarize each purpose in one sentence:
> ³Information collected to enable contact between the registrant and <who> <to
> accomplish what>²
> o    Think in terms of explaining to the data subject why data is being
> collected for this purpose ­ keep it concise and simple.
> o    Are the tasks/users identified by your team so diverse and distinct that
> they may be more than one purpose? If so, split them up and describe each
> purpose separately.
> o    Which purposes covered by other teams are closely related to or overlap
> the purpose(s) covered by your team?
> o    Is there any data collected specifically for the stated purpose? Or does
> that purpose use only data collected for other purposes?
> If anyone has thoughts about any of these items, please share them with the
> team; we will discuss them on our call.
> Chuck
>  
>  
> 
> From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:37 PM
> To: Chuck <consult at cgomes.com>
> Cc: Metalitz, Steven <met at msk.com>; lisa at corecom.com; Bastiaan Goslings
> <bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5 at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update
>  
> 
> Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now
> forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be
> finding a way to work with the team who have worked on ³Legal² and i think we
> may need at some point work with the ³investigation² team which in reality
> also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions.
> They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that
> overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But
> that would be a later stage approach.
> 
>  
> 
> I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone
> sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the
> documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid
> out as an appendix to each document.
> 
>  
> 
> Another area that we may add at a later stage is ³new gtld auction proceeds²
> they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-6 mailing list
> Gnso-rds-pdp-6 at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-6


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-6/attachments/20171107/d9668b41/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 2772 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-6/attachments/20171107/d9668b41/image001-0001.gif>

More information about the Gnso-rds-pdp-6 mailing list