[registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] [ALAC] Fwd: [Gnso-epdp-team] BC Consensus Call Responses

cw at christopherwilkinson.eu cw at christopherwilkinson.eu
Mon Feb 18 09:01:16 UTC 2019

Good morning:

Regarding the BC/IPC comments, jut received:

1.	Recommendation #1, Purpose 2 

I do not support the proposed amendment. (a) it permits too much third party interpretation of what those terms mean. 
(b) that approach has in the past been abused through ‘bulk access’. My reading of Annex F is that bulk access would still be permitted. I disagree.

2.	Recommenations #16 and #17 Geographic Distinction.

My understanding is that ALAC supports a uniform best practice ICANN privacy policy and practice. Neither the EPDP nor BC/IPC reflect this. 
BC/IPC would kick that can down the road. ALAC should restate the At Large position. I see no justification for ‘compromise’ here.



PS:  As far as I can see the EPDP report does not contain a summary statement of their [17] Recommendations. Where are they?

> On 18 Feb 2019, at 04:46, Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com> wrote:

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registration-issues-wg/attachments/20190218/e5aa7842/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org

More information about the registration-issues-wg mailing list