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

Thu Sep 28 02:20:09 UTC 2017

Indeed yes, that is the one.  Sorry for the delay in response.  Life 
beckons every now and then....

cheers SP

On 2017-09-27 16:46, jonathan matkowsky wrote:
> Marika, yes, that's the one. Jonathan
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Marika Konings 
> <marika.konings at icann.org <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>> wrote:
>
>     I did a google search and found the following:
>     https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol126_schwartz.pdf
>     <https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol126_schwartz.pdf>.
>     Stephanie, can you confirm this is the article you were referring to?
>
>     Best regards,
>
>     Marika
>
>     *From: *<gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>     <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of jonathan
>     matkowsky <jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net
>     <mailto:jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net>>
>     *Date: *Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 11:57
>     *To: *Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>     <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>
>     *Cc: *"gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>     <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>     <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
>     *Subject: *Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] FW: WSGR Final Memorandum
>
>     Hi, Stephanie. I am getting caught up as I was traveling last
>     week, and then the Jewish holidays...I was hoping you can send me
>     a copy of that law review article you referenced or a citation so
>     I can pull it if not publicly available?  Thanks, in advance,
>     Jonathan
>
>     On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Stephanie Perrin
>     <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>     <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:
>
>         Binding corporate rules, with a set of derogations that would
>         be specified in certain contracts,  (as the kind of
>         contractual clauses that clarify what can be done in certain
>         jurisdictions) is not that hard to build.  International
>         companies have been working on these mechanisms since the
>         90s,  the Article 29 group have clarified how to do it in a
>         series of their Opinions, .....and the corporations and
>         working parties in the International Conference of Privacy and
>         Data Commissioners made sure these things would work
>         internationally.  yes it is work but global operations require
>         quite a bit of work. Time to get going on it.
>
>         The lawyer we hired for this opinion (Chris Kuner) is an
>         expert in this, he has worked with tons of companies striving
>         for compliance with the Directive 95/46. ICANN is awfully late
>         to the party, but this is certainly not the most complex
>         application in the world to figure out....
>
>         Paul Schwarz (another data protection lawyer who is expert in
>         these matters) wrote an excellent article on the coming
>         confrontation between the US and EU over the GDPR (Harvard Law
>         REview 2012).   He notes the excellent work that companies and
>         dpas did to make sure that such mechanisms as contractual
>         clauses actually worked, when dealing with the Directive. 
>         Historically, the first companies to really start pushing
>         contractual clauses way back in the early 90s as I recall were
>         the direct marketing companies.  Anyway....the bottom line is
>         where there is a will there is a way.  I hope we can muster a
>         common will to actually work on solutions, instead of denying
>         the reality of rights and data protection law, a position that
>         puts various parties at risk in a variety of ways.
>
>         Stephanie
>
>         On 2017-09-27 10:04, Chuck wrote:
>
>             It's hard to disagree with Sam's point that "ICANN needs a resilient and
>
>             sustainable policy strategy here.  A strategy that sits above the weeds of
>
>             conflicting GDPRs".  Put in other words that we have all heard many times, a
>
>             one size fits all approach will not work for all users, for all
>
>             jurisdictions, for all registrants, for all registrars, for all registries,
>
>             etc.
>
>               
>
>             Chuck
>
>               
>
>             -----Original Message-----
>
>             From:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>             <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>
>
>             [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>             <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Sam Lanfranco
>
>             Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 5:53 AM
>
>             To:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
>             Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] FW: WSGR Final Memorandum
>
>               
>
>             I remind us that we are looking at some principles to drive a process here,
>
>             the selection of the MPDS. We should not get lost in the weeds of
>
>             conflicting GDPRs.
>
>               
>
>             Nations will have differences, to be negotiated, and ICANN itself (as
>
>             ICANN) should retain some procedural latitude to both navigate those
>
>             conflicts, and at the same time accept that it has an organizational
>
>             stakeholder interest in the resolution of those conflicts.
>
>               
>
>             This is the world we live in. It will never be neat and tidy, so ICANN needs
>
>             a resilient and sustainable policy strategy here.
>
>             A strategy that sits above the weeds of conflicting GDPRs.
>
>               
>
>             Sam Lanfranco
>
>             (ncsg/npoc)
>
>             _______________________________________________
>
>             gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>
>             gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
>             https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>             <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>
>               
>
>             _______________________________________________
>
>             gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>
>             gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
>             https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>             <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>         gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>         <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>
>
>     *******************************************************************
>     This message was sent from RiskIQ, and is intended only for the
>     designated recipient(s). It may contain confidential or
>     proprietary information and may be subject to confidentiality
>     protections. If you are not a designated recipient, you may not
>     review, copy or distribute this message. If you receive this in
>     error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this
>     message. Thank you.
>
>     *******************************************************************
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> This message was sent from RiskIQ, and is intended only for the 
> designated recipient(s). It may contain confidential or proprietary 
> information and may be subject to confidentiality protections. If you 
> are not a designated recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute 
> this message. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender 
> by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank 
> you.******************************************************************* 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170927/847bc063/attachment-0001.html>