[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] FW: WSGR Final Memorandum

Tue Sep 26 22:17:48 UTC 2017

Much of this problem goes away if we all agree that EU-based registrars
should henceforth only be allowed to accept registrants in the EU. Aside
from the effect on EU registrars' revenue, what's the logical argument
against that from a policy perspective?

After all, isn't the purpose of the GDPR to protect *EU residents*?

John Horton
President and CEO, LegitScript

*Follow LegitScript*: LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com>  |  Facebook
<https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript>  |  Twitter
<https://twitter.com/legitscript>  |  *Blog <http://blog.legitscript.com/>*
  |  Newsletter <http://go.legitscript.com/Subscription-Management.html>

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Jeremy Kennelly <jeremy at csec.ca> wrote:

> Especially since those laws are not immutable, so even if we agreed in
> principle that they were an appropriate baseline today, even by the time
> today's interpretation was codified the legal understanding and/or the
> regulations themselves are likely to have changed.
>
> It must feel to the group like I and others are being difficult on this
> issue but this is not a good foundation for an international standard.  Do
> we maybe need to look at standard that provides a baseline level of privacy
> protection and guidance/building blocks for registrars and other
> constituents with stricter legal requirements?
>
> On Sep 26, 2017 5:54 PM, "John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg" <
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org> wrote:
>
>> I want to point out something on page 17, namely this quote:
>>
>> "We think the best way to avoid conflicts would be to try to bring the
>> data processing practices of ICANN and the registrars in line with EU data
>> protection law as much as possible, and to give primacy to EU data
>> protection requirements when they clash with those of other jurisdictions."
>>
>> This is a patently offensive claim of European imperialism. One ventures
>> down this road with great consequences.
>> j
>>
>> On 9/26/2017 4:29 PM, Chuck wrote:
>>
>> As most of you recall, at the request of multiple WG members, we decided
>> in early June to engage a law firm with experience in European data
>> protection law to provide our WG with independent answers to the same
>> questions we asked the European data protection experts earlier in the
>> year.  The final report from that effort is what Marika sent to the list
>> shortly after our WG call today; it is attached to this message as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> All members are requested to review this report by Friday of this week if
>> possible.  The leadership team has prepared a list of principles that are
>> excerpted from the WSGR Final Report and/or from the Data Expert answers
>> that we think will be relevant to our ongoing work. We have asked the small
>> advisory group that we formed in early June to review the principles and
>> let us know if the excerpts are accurate and complete.  After they have had
>> time to respond, we will finalize the principles document and send it to
>> the full WG for all to review; our goal is to do that by the end of this
>> week so that we can use it in our WG meeting next week.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is the opinion of the leadership team that the information the Data
>> Protection experts provided has been confirmed by WSGR in their final
>> report, albeit with more detail in some cases.  We also believe that our
>> objective of obtaining an independent analysis of the questions has been
>> met, so it is now time for us to put the information to use in answering
>> the first four questions in our charter and that is the plan starting next
>> week.  To facilitate that, the principles will be mapped to the first four
>> charter questions, a task that is now underway.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am sure this WG could debate the answers received for the next six
>> months but we are not going to do that.  We received answers from the Data
>> Protection experts.  Some feared bias so we obtained an independent
>> analysis.  That analysis confirms the information that we had already been
>> given with some clarifying insights.  It is now time to apply that
>> information to our deliberation and finish answering critical questions in
>> our charter and develop RDS requirements for Phase 1.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I left anything out or anyone on the leadership team wants to add
>> anything, please feel free to do.
>>
>>
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounce
>> s at icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Marika
>> Konings
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 26, 2017 9:54 AM
>> *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] WSGR Final Memorandum
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>>
>>
>> As discussed during today’s meeting, please find attached for your review
>> and consideration the final memorandum from Wilson Sonsini Goodrich &
>> Rosati, LLP (WSGR) concerning the final responses to EU data protection
>> questions re. gTLD Registration Directory data. Chuck will follow up on
>> this message shortly with further instructions and next steps.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Marika
>>
>>
>>
>> *Marika Konings*
>>
>> *Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation
>> for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *
>>
>> *Email: marika.konings at icann.org <marika.konings at icann.org>  *
>>
>>
>>
>> *Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO*
>>
>> *Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses
>> <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages
>> <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>. *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing listgnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>>
>> John Bambenek
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170926/2ddeb8c5/attachment-0001.html>