[Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy] Checklist and summaries

[Farell Folly]

I volunteer to summarize :

   1. WHOIS : Blind men and an Elphant : 23 pages
   2. SA055, GNSO initial report on Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation
   Issues Policy Development Process : 93 pages.

Best regards !

Le mar. 5 avr. 2016 à 18:25, David Cake via Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy <
gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org> a écrit :

> You beat me to sending that out by seconds, Lisa.
>
> And Stacie Walsh has volunteered to summarise
> Article 29 WP on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy
> Law (3 docs)
> Article 29 WP Opinion on the application of the data protection principles
> to WHOIS directories (1 doc)
> Thank you Stacie!
>
> David
>
>
> > On 6 Apr 2016, at 1:18 AM, Lisa Phifer via Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy <
> gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org> wrote:
> >
> > As requested during today's WG call, attached is the 4 April version of
> this checklist.
> >
> > At 09:25 AM 4/5/2016, David Cake via Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy wrote:
> >> Staff has helpfully prepared a checklist of documents for the team so
> far, which is attached. I’ve very much appreciated the contribution of
> those who have suggested additional documents, and please feel free to
> suggest more, but with an eye to wrapping up this work fairly quickly, we
> should begin to focus more on summarisation of documents. You can see on
> this checklist there are quite a few still to be summarised. We will
> further be talking about this on todays call.
> >>
> >> Please volunteer to summarise documents if you can. Summaries should be
> short and to the point, and your summary should include which aspects of
> that document you feel are relevant to privacy considerations and why (some
> documents may also be relevant to other aspects of the WGs work). If you
> disagree with a summary presented by another, please don’t try to engage
> in prolonged discussion on the WG - if you think the summary is misleading
> or lacking please attempt your own summary and we can attempt some
> synthesis, if you have a more substantive issue then it is probably best
> addressed during deliberations of the entire WG.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy mailing list
> >> Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-privacy
> > <Input-Checklist-Privacy 4 April
> 2016.pdf>_______________________________________________
> > Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy mailing list
> > Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-privacy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy mailing list
> Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-privacy
>
-- 
Best regards,

@__f_f__
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-privacy/attachments/20160407/75fc5d40/attachment.html>