[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] FW: IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 24 January Meeting

[Dotzero]

Nathalie,

This is an interesting set of thoughts that is worth consideration.

Michael Hammer.

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 5:07 PM, nathalie coupet via gnso-rds-pdp-wg <
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org> wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> Sorry for missing the call. There’s one more legitimate use for
> processing: verification of the trustworthiness of a website.
> Also, a psychological use: online accountability.
>
> They are legitimate purpose, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that personal
> data should be processed, just because they are legitimate uses for third
> parties. The data subject’s rights to privacy should come into the balance
> to temper the ‘legitimacy’ of third party uses.
> If not, the GDPR is absolutely worthless and I think it would be going too
> far in the other direction.
> There’s an imbalance in our group: we barely have any end-users and
> website owners.
> This really jeopardizes our work and is too one-sided.
> I don’t know why stakeholders who vote against their own interests and in
> favor of a solution that would take into account the rights of people who
> don’t even show up (the general public) to defend their own interests.
> I try to imagine a contract where I, the registrant, would be forced to
> accept any and all ‘legitimate’ third party uses of my data, as defined by
> a variety of private interest that do not take any n consideration my right
> to protect my PPI. It would definitely be abuse. It’s tantamount to
> negating an individual’s right to privacy...
> But if third party rights derive from obligations and duties I must abide
> by, then I must consent to them, and third parties have then rights that
> are the reverse side of my obligations.
> For example, if I have a duty of care, proper use and prohibition to use
> my website to do harm, then third parties have a right to enforce their
> legitimate use of protecting their or their client’s property by having my
> PPI processed for their benefit.
> This takes into account the spirit and the letter of the GDPR.
> The course taken by this WG negates the existence of the GDPR and it’s
> attempt to give more control over PPI to data subject.
>
> Nathalie
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 26, 2018, at 9:08 AM, Chuck <consult at cgomes.com> wrote:
>
> Please remember to complete this week’s poll not later than *COB Saturday
> 27 January.*
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Lisa Phifer
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 24, 2018 7:01 AM
> *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 24
> January Meeting
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> In follow-up to this week’s WG meeting, *all RDS PDP WG Members* are
> encouraged to participate in the following poll:
>
>
>
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/LQC2YJH
>
>
>
> Responses should be submitted through the above URL. For offline
> reference, a PDF of poll questions can also be found at:
>
>
>
>               https://community.icann.org/download/
> attachments/74580038/Poll-from-24January-Call.pdf
>
>
>
> *This poll will close at COB Saturday 27 January. *
>
>
>
> Please note that you *must be a WG Member* to participate in polls. If
> you are a WG Observer wishing to participate in polls, you must first
> contact gnso-secs at icann.org to upgrade to WG Member.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Lisa
>
> <Untitled attachment 00003.txt>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180127/fa663d20/attachment.html>