[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Meetings/Conversations with Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners

[John Bambenek]

On 9/26/2017 10:47 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
> Amazing simplification right there. Sadly, sticking one's head in the
> sand and pretending there is no problem does not solve the issue.
>
> I do not remember for example how facebook forces you to have any
> public information. 

Nor does a system when consumers get whois privacy for free. Ergo, they
give consent... ergo the exact OPPOSITE of what you just said.

> If you chose to you can keep everything private. 

That's an oversimplification. Facebook still makes you take great effort
on a routine basis to keep it private.  The solution isn't "disable
facebook" any more than it is the ideal in some of this group to disable
whois because the purpose of ICANN is NOT to facilitate the acquisition
of domain names by registrants and getting the registries paid. It's the
safety and security of the internet. Some of those letters you made
reference to in an earlier email deal with transparency in what YOU tell
your customers, not on whether whois should not exist.

> And with regard to the cross-border data transfers they do, I think I
> already pointed out that these have successfully been attacked in
> court. So the story is still developing there, definitely not solved.
>
> The same applies to all companies that handle private details of EU
> citizens. just because it has not come to a court action or fine yset
> does not mean they will be able to continue their practices unchanged.

Which is why I've argued for a change... that whois privacy should be
free for consumers. Let's do that and just move on already.

>
> As for dying on that hill, it always takes (at least) two to do
> battle. I am quite content to sitting on this hill and not having to
> defend it...
>
> Best,
>
> Volker
>
>
> Am 26.09.2017 um 17:35 schrieb John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg:
>> PS: And no, consent does not fix this, since consent is also bound by
>> very tight rules that do not fit current practices. But we have danced
>> that dance enough on the list already.
>>
>> Then facebook, gmail, and quite frankly, THE ENTIRE INTERNET cannot
>> exist if this were true.
>>
>> But it's not true. It'd a red herring.
>>
>> This is a SOLVED PROBLEM for people who process MORE sensitive
>> information that whois. Why people insist on fighting and dying on this
>> hill, I have no idea. Especially when it applies to a small subset of
>> domain registrants.
>>
>>
>> On 9/26/2017 10:32 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
>>> PS: And no, consent does not fix this, since consent is also bound by
>>> very tight rules that do not fit current practices. But we have danced
>>> that dance enough on the list already.
>

-- 
--

John Bambenek