[council] ICANN's Legislative/Regulatory Tracker -- Recommended Improvements

Mon Apr 8 14:22:59 UTC 2019

Dear All:

1.            I think valid points are being made. Dialogue is key, but I also believe the report – if quality is assured – can be a useful tool to streamline discussions and set priorities. The regulatory impact report should supplement, not replace, dialogue with ICANN’s government relations staff.

If we indeed want the report to help structure the dialogue and assist with our policy planning, it is key that the report contains correct and up-to-date information. I agree that the current approach, where the community is expected to identify errors and omissions, is inappropriate. We may expect from ICANN that it is on top of things and consults with regional experts to correctly assess the impact of new/impending legislation.

2.            It is my understanding that the Report currently focuses on Privacy/Data Protection and Cybersecurity only. Should we/ICANN org not expand the scope? For instance, it might be useful to add the proposed EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (already approved by the European Parliament) to our watchlist, as well as regulations regarding net neutrality or geoblocking. I would expect us/ICANN to take a proactive approach on the legislative/regulatory field.

I am interested to hear your thoughts.

Best,

Flip

Flip Petillion
fpetillion at petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law

[signature_787659922]<http://www.petillion.law/>

  Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats

From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "McGrady, Paul D." <PMcGrady at winston.com>
Date: Sunday, 7 April 2019 at 13:16
To: Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>, "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] ICANN's Legislative/Regulatory Tracker -- Recommended Improvements

Hi All,

As I tried to express from the Council table in Kobe, I guess I am less concerned with the format, etc. of the document and, instead, believe that we need ICANN’s government relations folks to visit us at Council and highlight the main issues it sees heading our way.  Otherwise, this is just one more of a thousand documents we all need to read to get ready for the next meeting and we may or may not have the appropriate sense of urgency.  We can’t let whether or not contracted parties may face a fine be the only method by which we decide compliance with a forthcoming law is, or is not, important and urgent.  This process needs to be a dialogue with Org staff, not a pen pal.

Best,
Paul

From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Martin Pablo Silva Valent
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2019 8:39 PM
To: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org; council at gnso.icann.org
Subject: Re: [council] ICANN's Legislative/Regulatory Tracker -- Recommended Improvements

I now in the LAC region we have intensive community activity with a LAC Strategy group and all. I can alway give my input, but it will always be better to not duplicate efforts, If the LAC staff is already doing update on this issue , I am fine following that work and not leading a new one from scratch. If they are not specially doing an update on this, then I am happily helping them to put something together. In all cases, I think ICANN regional staff could send a few emails and get legal updates from every LAC country, specially if it uses the partnerships and links it has with NGOs and Chambers.

What do you guys think? Should we talk this as an GNSO thing or level thing region by region?

Best,

Martin Silva Valent

mpsilvavalent at gmail.com<mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>

Partner | Silva.legal
martin at silva.legal<mailto:martin at silva.legal>
Director | Dat.as
martin.silva at dat.as<mailto:martin.silva at dat.as>

Skype ID: mpsilvavalent
Tel: +5491164993943
Libertador 5990, Off. 406
Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Este email, incluyendo adjuntos, podría contener información  confidencial protegida por ley y es para uso exclusivo de su destinatario. Si  Ud. no es el destinatario, se le advierte que cualquier uso, difusión, copia o  retención de este email o su contenido está estrictamente prohibido.  Si Ud.  recibió este email por error, por favor avise inmediatamente al remitente por  teléfono o email y borre el mismo de su computadora. / This  e-mail, including any attachments, may contain information that is protected by  law as privileged and confidential, and is transmitted for the sole use of the  intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby  notified that any use, dissemination, copying or retention of this e-mail or the  information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If you have received this  e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or reply  e-mail, and permanently delete this e-mail from your computer system.

On Apr 6, 2019, at 4:52 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com<mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:

Thanks, Keith.

To kick off this discussion, broadly there are three areas where I would like to see improvements to this document.

Firstly, I'd like to see a new planning stage altogether. This should see a proper regulatory impact assessment carried out, so we can understand the intended rationale for a law/regulation/directive, specific extracts of the proposed text that could have implications on activities within ICANN's remit, and perhaps most importantly, the document should outline concretely what implications are anticipated for ICANN. A roadmap or timeline should be included so we understand how imminent the law/regulation/directive is and when we need to take action.

The current, crowdsourced approach where the community is expected to identify errors and omissions in the document is inappropriate. If ICANN is a professional organization then its professional staff should be monitoring the regulatory landscape within which we operate.

Then, I'd like to see a new stage or chapter to the report outlining the response being taken. So, once a law/regulation/directive is here and we've identified we need to take action and we know when enforcement begins, the report should offer a detailed analysis that outlines more specifically what options the GNSO Council or other parties could consider taking to ensure legal compliance.

Third, once a law/regulation/directive is in place and we have taken actions to comply with it, ICANN should monitor 1) the impact the law/regulation/directive has had as it relates to ICANN's remit, 2) evaluate how successful/unsuccessful our response was, and 3) if necessary and only with extensive community consultation first feed back to lawmakers if there has been a mismatch between their intended rationale for a law/regulation/directive and reality.

There are two other characteristics that I consider to be very important for this tracker.

It should use clear, succinct, and plain language, regardless of the issue's complexity.

It must be accurate and kept up to date, always based upon the latest information. In order for this resource to be useful it should not be circulated until ICANN has verified that it transports the correct and necessary messages.

Best wishes,

Ayden Férdeline

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, April 4, 2019 8:35 PM, Drazek, Keith via council <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>> wrote:

Ayden, Darcy, Erika, Flip, Michele, Phillipe and Tatiana:

During our GNSO Working Session in Kobe, the seven of you volunteered to help develop GNSO Council recommendations for improvements to ICANN’s current Legislative/Regulatory tracking effort.

As we discussed, ICANN’s work in this area is relatively new and still evolving, and we have an opportunity to engage with Theresa’s group to help shape their approach to ensure it is applicable to our policy work and process management responsibilities. While their work product is currently a spreadsheet, I recall we agreed it needs to go much deeper in analysis and demonstrate a predictive capability for where future or existing regulations impact GNSO policies, in effect now or under future development.

Please work together and with Staff to help kick off this important and timely work.

Thanks,
Keith

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

________________________________
The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. If this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author. Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under applicable tax laws and regulations.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20190408/2464dfa5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7393 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20190408/2464dfa5/image001-0001.png>