<div><div dir="auto">In a similar vein, ICANN could establish an “Over-enforce the GDPR Fund,” in which everyone who thinks the GDPR’s data blackout should be extended to the data of non-EU and legal persons would pay in, and it would be used to defray the expenses incurred by those who should have access to information and instead must expend additional time, money and effort, and often incur additional harm, due GDPR over-enforcement.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 5:03 AM Volker Greimann <<a href="mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net">vgreimann@key-systems.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Maybe you are hitting on something here. <br>
</p>
<p>ICANN could just establish a "Leave-Whois-as-it-is" legal defense
fund. Everyone who argues that whois should remain as it is has to
pay into that fund and everyone who is fined by data protection
violations can take the fines and their legal costs out of that
fund. Of course, that would necessitate huge investments to set up
the fund from mainly volunteer organizations that do not actually
have the means to support it.</p>
<p>Best,</p>
<p>Volker<br>
</p></div><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<div class="m_8186598745109331878moz-cite-prefix">Am 14.02.2018 um 02:21 schrieb Rubens
Kuhl:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On 13 Feb 2018, at 20:32, John Horton <<a href="mailto:john.horton@legitscript.com" target="_blank">john.horton@legitscript.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="m_8186598745109331878Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#444444">Thanks,
Rubens -- I don't agree with that interpretation. (I
think you mean the Q&A memo Section 2, right?) See
memo <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdpr-memorandum-part2-18dec17-en.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>. Let me know
if you meant the first or a different one. </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It's exactly that memo. </div>
<div>Since you don't agree, does that mean that your
organisation is willing to pay every GDPR fine contracted
parties get from following your interpretation ? Because if you
are unwilling to do that, then your belief in that
interpretation is not rock solid.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What I can tell you is that this risk has been
flagged by that paper, by the eco model and by internal analysis
of some registries, all independently of each other; which means
you will likely see a good number of contracted parties
following exactly the path I outlined in order to mitigate this
risk. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you see things differently, get Europeans DPAs to
put that in writing, and we are all good to go. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Rubens</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="m_8186598745109331878mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
<a class="m_8186598745109331878moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<a class="m_8186598745109331878moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<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/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></blockquote></div></div>