[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN @ IGF2017

[theo geurts]

Thanks for the update Michael and here I thought it was going to be a 
slow IGF meeting. If you can send the screen scrape offlist that would 
be great.

Best,

Theo



On 19-12-2017 18:26, Michael Palage wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> So I just finished listening to the IGF 2017 Session entitled ICANN – 
> Looking ahead – Challenges and Opportunities.   I would recommend this 
> as a MUST listen session when the archive is made available.  I was 
> able to do a screen scrape and capture the transcript for those that 
> are interested I could send to you directly.
>
> What I found rather concerning is a statement from Goran that ICANN 
> would be circulating three models with the community in January from 
> which he would choose one that would be the basis for ICANN 
> compliance.   Here is that specific excerpt:
>
> And in a very short period of time we come up with three different 
> models. I always like three different models, that will be composed 
> for the community so the community can comment on potential solutions 
> to this problem. And after that, as Becky said, I have to make a 
> decision. Because as the President and CEO of ICANN I have to make a 
> decision how my organize will be compliant with the law.
>
> I provided a remote intervention which asked the basis for how ICANN 
> predetermined that only three models would be considered by the 
> community. Listed below is the question and response from Goran:
>
> >> How have we determined only three models will be considered by the 
> community. >> We have asked the community for giving us models and we 
> seem to -- and the reason I am saying three, it seems like the 
> proposes we are getting in from the community actually rotates around 
> three different solutions. So that's why. And we're going to publish 
> them and we're going to ask community for input on that. So we 
> constructed a system for having that input, but then we have to 
> respond because it is very hard to motivate, to go to the DPAs and say 
> we think we now comply with the laws, but we also have three 
> alternatives to be in compliance with the law. I think that would be a 
> problem, and I say that as a former regulator.
>
> I personally found this answer from Goran unacceptable. So I asked a 
> follow-up question toward the end of the session that does not appear 
> to have been captured in the transcript. Specifically I asked if ICANN 
> could share the three models they were considering now, instead of 
> waiting until January and his response was non-responsive.  Goran was 
> again non responsive to this question.
>
> So here is my proposal for an additional topic for tomorrow’s call. 
> ICANN has largely been non-responsive (some in this group may 
> characterize ICANN’s actions as being ignorant) to Data Privacy 
> concerns for 18 years of its existence. While the GDPR has recently 
> gotten its attention, it has provided de minimis  leadership in 
> actually solving the problem, although it does deserve credit for the 
> WSGR and Hamilton Memos. However, I believe ICANN OWES us a high level 
> summary of the three model types it is considering NOW (not in 
> January). To be clear, I am NOT seeking access to the more specific 
> models that ICANN will drop on us in January.  I find it unacceptable 
> that ICANN is putting contracting parties at risk under GDPR while its 
> CEO decides which “one” model it will deem acceptable under ICANN 
> compliance. When convenient, ICANN cloaks itself in the joint 
> controller paradigm yet ignores the explicit wording of Article 26 
> which states “Where two or more controllers jointly determine the 
> purposes and means of processing, they shall be joint controllers. 
> They shall in a transparent manner determine their respective 
> responsibilities for compliance with the obligations under this 
> Regulation.”
>
> I will stop this email now before I further expand upon my 
> disappointment in ICANN leadership regarding this subject as I need to 
> finish a more in-depth analysis of the Hamilton #2 memo before 
> tomorrow’s call. Perhaps Hamilton memo #3 will arrive before Christmas 
> (on the eve of ICANN’s traditional extended holiday shutdown period) 
> because I am sure us humble volunteers can re-arrange our holiday 
> plans to read this before ICANN graciously shares with the community 
> its three pre-determined (yet highly guarded) models that Goran will 
> choose from.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20171219/185a33fc/attachment-0001.html>