[CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Urgent EPDP question

[Alan Greenberg]

Thanks for the quick replies.

I agree that the issue that a legal person may have some "natural 
person" information associated with it. But there is no way that a 
registrar can reasonable parse that, so it is up to the registrant to 
rid their entries of natural person information if they choose to 
include it. And yes, "Alan Greenberg Inc" had personal information in 
it. As does alangreenberg.org. But no one forces me to have a domain name.

I find particularly amusing the issue of a Legal Person including 
name-identifying e-mails. Clearly that is a choice which they may 
know about, but the registrar, registry or ICANN cannot. If you wish 
to be suitable amused, consider that there are several families in 
the US with a surname of "Contact". Abuse.Contact at gmail.com is 
potentially a protected address!

Certainly registrars and registries would like to simplify their 
life. And adding a Natural/Legal flag will not be a trivial activity. 
But that does not imply it is not the right way to go.

Alan


At 14/10/2018 11:42 PM, you wrote:
>In agreement of contractual parties of having 2 systems,  one to 
>protect the "natural person" privacy information for every one 
>globally and not only those from Europe.
>The second is for the "legal persons" and because they're under 
>licence agreements in the legal system of their respective 
>countries.  Hence moving to a two registered system has to have a 
>limited and derminate timeframe to move towards the dual registrant 
>system. I don't think their concerns about changing the system, but 
>it seems it goes beyond that.
>
>If there are concerns about the micro commercial business for 
>individual who function without any registration in their countries, 
>it would be their individual problem in how to be accountable to 
>their countries requirements.
>
>Nadira
>
>
>
>On Mon, Oct 15, 2018, 05:01 Holly Raiche 
><<mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net>h.raiche at internode.on.net> wrote:
>Folks
>An  argument against differentiation is that the contracted parties 
>want to be able, as much as possible, to implement one system for 
>managing information rather than having to differentiate between the 
>license of a name being a natural person and the licensee of a name 
>being a corporate person.
>Another is says that there are circumstances where information about 
>legal entities may amount to personal information - for example, 
>when a small business (usually a legal person) has used the actual 
>name of the person as the business name, or where, in the case of a 
>legal person, the contact details provided are for  a named 
>individual - thus GDPR protections should apply uniformly.
>My personal view is that, from the perspective of users, the 
>protections of GDPR really need only apply to natural persons.
>That means that companies will need to be careful not to provide 
>personal contact information for the RAA/Registry agreements.  And 
>from an end user point of view, the management of systems to 
>differentiate legal from natural persons is not our concern.
>
>Holly
>
> > On Oct 15, 2018, at 12:12 PM, Alan Greenberg 
> <<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
> >
> > Here is a question that we need an answer on no later than 
> Tuesday morning.
> >
> > GDPR requires the information related to Natural Persons be 
> protected (for those resident in Europe) be protected. GDPR does 
> not apply to Legal Persons (ie companies).
> >
> > ICANN's Temporary Spec allows contracted parties to treat all 
> registrant alike and subject to GDPR.
> >
> > The EPDP Charter includes questions about whether contracted 
> parties may or must treat Legal Persons differently from Natural Persons.
> >
> > The GAC, BC and IPC have made strong statements about the need to 
> restrict GDPS to Natural Persons. The contracted parties are 
> pushing back - strongly. The words vary, but in essence what they 
> are saying ranges from there should be no constraint on them to 
> yes, they may differentiate but with an unspecified 
> time-frame.  (As you may note if you looked at the RDS-WHOIS2 
> report, registrars under the 2013 RAA must do some validation of 
> contact information for new an transfered domains, but none to 
> simple renewal. so there are currently 140,000,000 domains without 
> verified information (5 years after the 2013 RAA came into force) 
> and there is no requirement to ever validate their information - so 
> unspecified time frames can last a LONG time.)
> >
> > I personally feel that it is essential that we should 
> differentiate between legal persons and natural persons, just as 
> GDPR and other privacy legislation does.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CPWG mailing list
> > <mailto:CPWG at icann.org>CPWG at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
> > _______________________________________________
> > registration-issues-wg mailing list
> > 
> <mailto:registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org>registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
>
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>_______________________________________________
>CPWG mailing list
><mailto:CPWG at icann.org>CPWG at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20181015/2a6dbb3a/attachment-0001.html>