[IAG-WHOIS conflicts] Public comment summary posted

[Jamie Hedlund]

Dear Chris,

Thank you for your comments. I am sorry you were not able to provide them in
time (see attached email). Please see responses inline. I hope these are
helpful. Thanks.

Best,
Jamie

Jamie Hedlund
VP, Strategic Programs
Global Domains Division
ICANN
+1.202.374.3969 (m)
+1.202.570.7125 (d)
jamie.hedlund at icann.org

From:  Christopher Wilkinson <cw at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Date:  Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 15:11
To:  Jamie Hedlund <jamie.hedlund at icann.org>
Cc:  "whois-iag-volunteers at icann.org" <whois-iag-volunteers at icann.org>
Subject:  Re: [IAG-WHOIS conflicts] Public comment summary posted

Dear Jamie Hedlund:

Thankyou. I have taken note of this publication.

1. I do not agree with the characterisation of Appendix 4 as 'minority'
opinions.
No poll of the iAG members was ever taken; I am quite sure that the
criticisms of the policy evoked in Appendix 4 are very widely held. We can
consider how to characterize Appendix 4 prior to submitting the final report
to the GNSO Council.

2. I have strong reservations about the suggestion to refer the matter to
another GNSO PDP. The issues arise in the first place from a flawed GNSO PDP
a decade ago.
I have little confidence, that another such exercise would lead to a more
balanced and informed outcome. There was never any intention to "refer the
matter to another GNSO PDP.² Rather, the IAG¹s recommendations will be
submitted to the GNSO Council to review whether they are consistent with the
underlying policy and determine the next steps (see Statement of Work
<https://community.icann.org/display/WNLCI/WHOIS+and+national+law+conflicts+
IAG+Home> )

3. Even within the restrictive parameters of the IAG, it was agreed that the
existing policy had never been invoked; that should - at the very least -
have led the ICANN staff to consider why that is the case. It is quite clear
that the various 'trigger' mechanisms discussed in the report will not
facilitate ICANN in conforming to applicable privacy and data protection
laws in many jurisdictions. I don¹t recall an IAG request of ICANN staff to
consider why the procedure has not been invoked. I do recall during
discussion of the Statement of Work that there were widely differing views
as to why this is the case. This disagreement led to revisions of the SoW
text to remove a perceived bias toward considering the lack of use of the
procedure as evidence that it is flawed.

Regards

Christopher Wilkinson

On 21 Jan 2016, at 19:40, Jamie Hedlund <jamie.hedlund at icann.org> wrote:

> FYI - 
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/iag-whois-conflicts-privacy-2015-10-05-e
> n 
> <http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=3sVClaOwo5uihwlrrc4OfzQsvRRwK8tznNE7s
> 3dkmBMD294y0lcShPEwmrNzsM2toyG9UUIOJ1V0bxkPpSSZtGRmTVBwq8yzYf9iKnwMdGMWESNCpoV
> iJLruhWi24Mix_u6a2PqF3vslNNtSRbhxJPbaBpZk4DC8jbmALa5nMrRXo0eqnz-2B9Ps9xJPFJNX0
> UL-2F-2FJI3KnlPQtLax4sDAMUOleyokUItB1ySUKv0eZQ0yVNOU4CPsXxolzadQWFEIB3jt4FBhYc
> k7cuW-2B60WUNIUfplmEQLN49Pg8gnyn4WN5REwmeLm3WVCEgIuWpHjpntSOaUoK52mlUftmtKfbM8
> YQXuDh7vnDtn9gvVW0m9e1i8x7DYS-2FFnIAXqGTOXZSAc0qGjFopv0nIpMbX48Ukjmi36xTL31Ys3
> g94MzUCnwDSyh7dcY1VG2grcgOjjhYKxmTPChyu0R0URCtmlkx5eVp88UVc80ookOrqjXjBDJym3d6
> Tp6H-2Fhiyi-2BzVodf3oSYJtLUjEPVITQayq3DJ1X4MLfqCHRHctXbtcAljAIgqSS-2BbpDR-2ByJ
> EXYJifUdggvzwFu06pV3Rui-2Bkab0a-2FbweifS0RVMZdQhRhBLd8um4WIYn-2BdV2DgT23U5DKUM
> 44nn> 
> 
> Best,
> Jamie
> 
> Jamie Hedlund
> VP, Strategic Programs
> Global Domains Division
> ICANN
> +1.202.374.3969 (m)
> +1.202.570.7125 (d)
> jamie.hedlund at icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> Whois-iag-volunteers mailing list
> Whois-iag-volunteers at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/whois-iag-volunteers



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/whois-iag-volunteers/attachments/20160121/5e4ca05f/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Jamie Hedlund <jamie.hedlund at icann.org>
Subject: [IAG-WHOIS conflicts] Draft Comment Summary & Analysis
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:53:35 +0000
Size: 208185
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/whois-iag-volunteers/attachments/20160121/5e4ca05f/attachment-0001.mht>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4600 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/whois-iag-volunteers/attachments/20160121/5e4ca05f/smime-0001.p7s>