[Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy] Privacy sub-group

Farell Folly farellfolly at gmail.com
Tue Mar 29 09:29:39 UTC 2016


Dear all,

I agree again with David Cake. Let's focus on our topic. Stereotypes are
not good advisors for security/data privacy/data protection.

Le mar. 29 mars 2016 à 06:28, David Cake via Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy <
gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org> a écrit :

> The purpose of this sub-group is simply to decide what material is
> relevant and useful to the working groups deliberation, and help produce
> summaries etc that will guide the WG through the large amount of relevant
> material.
>
> Whether or not EU principles represent international best practice or are
> otherwise desirable for other jurisdictions is not a helpful debate to have
> in this sub-group. Some ICANN registrars are within EU jurisdictions, and
> so must comply with those rules, so it is relevant. Thank you Ayden for
> identifying some material that you feel is relevant to this working groups
> work.
>
> David
>
>
> On 29 Mar 2016, at 1:43 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ayden,
>
> EU rulings do not necessarily impact the law in the rest of the world,
> much less California.  I would not categorize an attempt to embrace EU
> principles as a "race to the top" nor would I categorize those principles
> as "international best practices."  Certainly, we as a group should not
> adopt such attitudes.  But, hey, it's nice to know where you stand.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Greg Shatan
>
>
>
> <image001.jpg>
>
>
> *Gregory S. Shatan | Partner*McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
>
> 245 Park Avenue, 27th Floor | New York, New York 10167
> T: 212-609-6873
> F: 212-416-7613
> gshatan @mccarter.com | www.mccarter.com
>
> BOSTON | HARTFORD | STAMFORD | NEW YORK | NEWARK
> EAST BRUNSWICK | PHILADELPHIA  | WILMINGTON | WASHINGTON, DC
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Ayden Fabien Férdeline <
> gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I would like to introduce some material relating to the 'right to be
>> forgotten' in Europe. Here's a court judgement
>> <https://links2.mixmaxusercontent.com/aMjjKHWxnLSD3SEwj/l/Y6pG8Inj7cxRfeEQg?rn=IyZy9mLu5WYjlGQ5NWY2lmcw1CckBXLzRmct82cudmI&re=IyZy9mLu5WYjlGQ5NWY2lmcw1CckBXLzRmct82cudmI>
>>  <
>> http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=152065&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=11654
>> >.
>>
>> The protection of personal data in Europe is seen as a fundamental right
>> on equal standing with all other human rights. The Court of Justice of the
>> European Union has consistently held that any and all data processing must
>> be subject to stringent proportionality assessments.
>>
>> It has been unsuccessfully argued that allowing users to delete their
>> data is an affront to other fundamental rights such as free speech. The
>> Court of Justice of the EU has consistently ruled that if and when the
>> privacy interests of the data subject outweigh the public interest, the
>> individual should be able to enforce his or her 'right to be forgotten'.
>>
>> This decision is something we should carefully consider when looking at
>> how long we retain information for. Certainly once a domain name has
>> expired, it would be difficult to justify under these rulings the continued
>> storage of the sensitive personal information of registrants.
>>
>> I appreciate that EU rulings do not necessarily impact Californian law,
>> but hey, why not have a race to the top and adopt international best
>> practices in privacy law… :-)
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden Férdeline
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 5:37 AM, David Cake via Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy <
>> gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Welcome all of you to the Privacy sub-team. Thanks to all of you for
>>> volunteering.
>>>
>>> Our task is first to collect information on privacy issues relevant to
>>> registration data. Then we will go on to decide how best to present that
>>> information for use of the working group - we may consolidate, summarise,
>>> prioritise etc in order to make the important information easily available.
>>> Hopefully the privacy experts on this group will help us locate the most
>>> important material, and make it easily digestible to the broader working
>>> group.
>>>
>>> This is a link to the RDS PDP WG document that describes the approach
>>> the WG agreed upon
>>> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58730879/RDS-PDP-Proposed-Summary-Approach.pdf
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_download_attachments_58730879_RDS-2DPDP-2DProposed-2DSummary-2DApproach.pdf&d=CwMBAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=u1EVRiHe_hJc7jxNs5HvrA_j6PFk6zDIgTHzeV5HW-I&s=2ky2gNfugoilw7hdnuB-Li1SPS7b_5IFQFq5Dm1QeEk&e=>
>>>
>>> At this early stage, we are in collection mode - please send documents
>>> that you think will be valuable to the group. If you add a bit more
>>> information for context as to why you think it would be useful, that will
>>> probably be very helpful for later work.
>>>
>>> Looking forward to working with you all.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy mailing list
>>> Gnso-rds-pdp-privacy at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-privacy
>>>
>>
>>
>> Ayden Férdeline
>> +44.77.8018.7421
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160329/7b3da052/attachment.html>


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