[IAG-WHOIS conflicts] Public comment summary posted

Thu Jan 21 22:14:13 UTC 2016

Thanks. See responses in line below.

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 17:01
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

Well: 

(a)  I have no brief for the 'Statement of Work' which was prepared without
my participation and already introduced significant biases into the IAG,
which I deplore. The first document that the IAG reviewed was the Statement
of Work. Many edits by IAG members were incorporated into the SoW. If you
did not participate it was because you chose not to, not because you were
not given the opportunity.

(b) I real that your staff summary does suggest that Appendix 4 should be
referred to the next GNSO PDP on Whois. I disagree. There are simple issues
here that can be corrected Now. Please indicate which simple issues in your
Appendix 4 can be corrected now, that are within the scope of the IAG¹s
mandate and that are supported by the IAG members.

( c) It is indeed the 'underlying policy' that is flawed. The cure has to be
found in the policy, not in the 'triggers' or such like. The IAG was
established to review the procedure which includes the triggers. It does not
have the authority to revise the policy. That would require initiation of a
GNSO PDP. 

CW

On 21 Jan 2016, at 22:33, Jamie Hedlund <jamie.hedlund at icann.org> wrote:

> Dear Christopher,
> 
> 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+IA
> G+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-
>> en 
>> <http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=3sVClaOwo5uihwlrrc4OfzQsvRRwK8tznNE7
>> s3dkmBMD294y0lcShPEwmrNzsM2toyG9UUIOJ1V0bxkPpSSZtGRmTVBwq8yzYf9iKnwMdGMWESNCp
>> oViJLruhWi24Mix_u6a2PqF3vslNNtSRbhxJPbaBpZk4DC8jbmALa5nMrRXo0eqnz-2B9Ps9xJPFJ
>> NX0UL-2F-2FJI3KnlPQtLax4sDAMUOleyokUItB1ySUKv0eZQ0yVNOU4CPsXxolzadQWFEIB3jt4F
>> BhYck7cuW-2B60WUNIUfplmEQLN49Pg8gnyn4WN5REwmeLm3WVCEgIuWpHjpntSOaUoK52mlUftmt
>> KfbM8YQXuDh7vnDtn9gvVW0m9e1i8x7DYS-2FFnIAXqGTOXZSAc0qGjFopv0nIpMbX48Ukjmi36xT
>> L31Ys3g94MzUCnwDSyh7dcY1VG2grcgOjjhYKxmTPChyu0R0URCtmlkx5eVp88UVc80ookOrqjXjB
>> DJym3d6Tp6H-2Fhiyi-2BzVodf3oSYJtLUjEPVITQayq3DJ1X4MLfqCHRHctXbtcAljAIgqSS-2Bb
>> pDR-2ByJEXYJifUdggvzwFu06pV3Rui-2Bkab0a-2FbweifS0RVMZdQhRhBLd8um4WIYn-2BdV2Dg
>> T23U5DKUM44nn> 
>> 
>> 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
> 
> <Mail Attachment.eml>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/whois-iag-volunteers/attachments/20160121/bf3c7a41/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- 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/bf3c7a41/smime-0001.p7s>