[council] ICANN Files Legal Action in Germany to Preserve WHOIS Data

[Michele Neylon - Blacknight]

I’d agree with the first part
The second part should be left up to the registrar as to how they want to implement it including any warnings.


--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br>
Date: Thursday 31 May 2018 at 11:29
To: Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo at aim.be>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] ICANN Files Legal Action in Germany to Preserve WHOIS Data




On 31 May 2018, at 07:10, Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo at aim.be<mailto:marie.pattullo at aim.be>> wrote:

Thanks Ayden – so no further forward. (An unfortunate reference to the artist formally known at WP29 though).
Anyone have any insights on next steps?

- Replace "MUST collect admin-c/tech-c" with "MAY collect" in the temp spec.
- Add an admin-c/tech-c consent mechanism that could read like this "If registrar offer to collect admin-c/tech-c information, consent MUST be sought from the data subjects to processing of PII" (example: registrant says that rubensk at nic.br<mailto:rubensk at nic.br> is the admin contact of example.com<http://example.com>; registrar sends e-mails to rubensk at nic.br<mailto:rubensk at nic.br> to confirm consent)


Rubens




M

From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Ayden Férdeline
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 10:19 AM
To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [council] ICANN Files Legal Action in Germany to Preserve WHOIS Data

An update; the Court has rejected ICANN's request for an injunction.

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-4-2018-05-30-en

-Ayden


‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 26 May 2018 2:26 AM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com<mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-05-25-en

There is a definite information asymmetry between the GNSO Council and ICANN org at the moment. This was not a spontaneous decision; it has clearly been in the works for weeks. I don't see how we can even contemplate launching an ePDP when we are not aware of all the actions that ICANN is up to behind the scenes vis-à-vis WHOIS.

—Ayden



_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20180531/907bb158/attachment.html>