[council] DATA RETENTION WAIVER OVH SAS

[Marika Konings]

The waiver request and supporting materials can be found here:
http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/updates/retention/waiver-reques
t-ovh-sas-27jan14-en.pdf.

Best regards,

Marika

From:  Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org>
Date:  Monday 17 March 2014 13:31
To:  Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
Cc:  Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-Systems.net>, Council
<council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject:  Re: [council] DATA RETENTION WAIVER OVH SAS

Thanks Volker and Marika. I had missed the preliminary notice in January.
After a quick Google search, I couldn’t find any links to OVH’s application
for a waiver. Is that publicly archived?

Thanks again.

Amr

On Mar 17, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
wrote:

> To add to Volker's response, the process used to request this waiver under
> the 2013 RAA can be found here:
> http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/updates/retention. Further
> information about this specific request can also be found here:
> http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27jan14-en.htm.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Marika
> 
> On 17/03/14 12:03, "Volker Greimann" <vgreimann at key-Systems.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hi Amr,
>> 
>> nothin has changed. The reason OVH got their waiver because in their
>> application they only asked for what ICANN sees as a "compromise
>> solution" that does not really meet the legal requirements of most
>> European registrars.
>> 
>> Volker
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Am 17.03.2014 11:58, schrieb Amr Elsadr:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I had meant to send an email about this earlier, but then the U.S. gov
>>> decided to steal the spotlight and attention (including mine) from most
>>> other issues. I was curious about the process and circumstances
>>> regarding this announcement:
>>> 
>>> http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-12mar14-en.htm
>>> 
>>> Last year, the EU's Article 29 Data Protection Working Party sent a
>>> letter to ICANN
>>> (http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/kohnstamm-to-crocker-chehade
>>> -06jun13-en), requesting waivers to EU-based registrars, but ICANN did
>>> not seem to respond in agreement in their reply
>>> (http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/jeffrey-to-kohnstamm-20sep13
>>> -en).
>>> 
>>> So what changed? Was the ICANN Procedure For Handling Conflicts with
>>> Privacy Law used? Was it something else? I believe this is something
>>> worth taking notice of, especially with the ongoing WHOIS activities?
>>> 
>>> I can¹t seem to find any details? Can someone point me in the right
>>> direction?
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> Amr



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20140317/17c3a141/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5056 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20140317/17c3a141/smime.p7s>