<div dir="ltr">Thanks, will get on</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Ayden Férdeline <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:icann@ferdeline.com" target="_blank">icann@ferdeline.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>Hi Allison,</div>
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>If you join the call that is going on as we speak, you can see the legal advice that we have received from external counsel. </div>
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>Best wishes,</div>
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div id="m_-3406631162655920887protonmail_mobile_signature_block">Ayden Férdeline
<br>Sent from ProtonMail Mobile</div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
<div>
<br>
<div>
<div>
<br>
</div>On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:38 pm, allison nixon <<a href="mailto:elsakoo@gmail.com" target="_blank">elsakoo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<blockquote class="m_-3406631162655920887protonmail_quote" type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">It's not irrelevent, because people here keep going on and on about how it's going to become illegal to publish any ownership info relating to domains, but many other sites on the internet clearly do not follow these extraordinarily strict guidelines
people want to set for whois. Clearly the legal requirements people want to impose here are false. Either that, or Facebook and ICANN follow different GDPRs. I see no logical counterarguments here, only attempts to throw out my argument so
it doesn't have to be contemplated.
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>I had to go inactive for the past month from the group due to unrelated reasons. Have we hired a lawyer to look these laws over yet? Or are we in the same illogical circular loop?</div>
<div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Sullivan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>></span> wrote:
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><span>On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:26:37PM -0400, allison nixon wrote:<br>
> When I search Facebook for "Allison Nixon" and I get back a list of people<br>
> with this name, their provided locations, and profile pics, is this also a<br>
> leak? no law mandates this behavior<br>
<br>
</span>It is clearly a way in which Facebook gives off -- if you like "leak"
<br>or "radiates" or "discloses" or whatever I don't care -- data about
<br>people named that and their photos. Given that Facebook's data
<br>handling is at least controversial with some Internet participants, I
<br>hardly see how holding up Facebook practices helps us know what to do.
<br>But in any case, it's not relevant, because Facebook is not making
<br>policies about public Internet infrastructure and we are.
<br>
<div class="m_-3406631162655920887HOEnZb">
<div class="m_-3406631162655920887h5">
<br>Best regards,
<br>
<br>A
<br>
<br>
<br>--
<br>Andrew Sullivan
<br>
<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>
<br>______________________________
_________________
<br>gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div>
<br>
</div>--
<br>
<div class="m_-3406631162655920887gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">______________________________<wbr>___
<br>Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div></div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">_________________________________<br>Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.</div>
</div>