[council] GAC Communique response

[Marie Pattullo]

Thanks all!

Sent from my iPhone

On 18 Apr 2019, at 01:05, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com<mailto:michele at blacknight.com>> wrote:

With Staff’s help the document has been updated with the edit that I suggested and that was accepted by the BC

So, hopefully, it’s acceptable to all

Regards

Michele


--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com
https://blacknight.blog /
http://ceo.hosting/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
-------------------------------
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<mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo at aim.be<mailto:marie.pattullo at aim.be>>
Date: Wednesday 17 April 2019 at 17:45
To: "Johan "Julf" Helsingius" <julf at julf.com<mailto:julf at julf.com>>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [council] GAC Communique response

Thanks Julf; the BC is happy with the shorter redraft proposed by Michele:


One of the expected outputs of Phase 2 of the EPDP is a recommendation

to incorporate privacy by design into any system used. The Council

trusts that it will be fully informed of, and involved where appropriate

in, the scoping and execution of any parallel technical efforts related

to such policies.





Sent from my iPhone

On 17 Apr 2019, at 18:27, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com<mailto:julf at julf.com>> wrote:
Thanks, Marie,

Michele (and others), how do you feel about this suggestion?

Could we please have all suggestions/opinions in before 23:59 UTC,
so the document can be frozen?

   Julf

On 16-04-19 16:50, Marie Pattullo wrote:

Thanks to all the drafters for your work on this!



The BC proposes the following amendment to point 1(iv):



iv) Any technical solutions need to be designed so that they take into
consideration the policies they need to handle. While some may argue
that systems are “flexible”enough to allow for a broad variety of
policies, one such policy which is critical, and which should be a
policy output from Phase 2 of the EPDP, is that the system must
incorporate well-understood, current state-of-the-art “privacy by
design” principles for online systems. The Council trusts that it will
be fully informed of, and implicated where appropriate in, the scoping
and execution of any parallel technical effort to define such a policy.

that is not the same as “privacy by design” which is probably what is
called for. Due to the nature of ICANN’s PDP processes, it may be
premature to attempt to launch parallel work on this.



Thanks again,



Marie







-----Original Message-----
From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Johan Helsingius
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2019 6:51 PM
To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Subject: [council] GAC Communique response



The suggested GNSO Council response to the GAC Communique attached.

Google docs version at:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WODNWffxy_dn6WRXV-_mJAwPhlh5V57T3L94BwQEtTE



                Julf




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20190418/0e395100/attachment-0001.html>