[Gnso-epdp-legal] High-level notes and action items from Legal Committee Call #11

[Crossman, Matthew]

Hi everyone,

Attached are a set of proposed questions that distill and consolidate the issues we identified on our last call regarding the interplay between the accuracy principle and the legal vs. natural self-identification.  I tried to lead with the key point of disagreement (do we consider only data subject/controller interests or third-parties as well) and then pull in some specific examples of text from the memos for clarification.

Welcome any comments or suggestions.

Thanks,
Matt

From: Gnso-epdp-legal <gnso-epdp-legal-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Caitlin Tubergen
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 9:12 PM
To: gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-legal] High-level notes and action items from Legal Committee Call #11

Dear Legal Committee:

Please find below high-level notes and action items from today’s Legal Committee meeting:

Action Items and High-Level Notes

1.       Q11 on reverse WHOIS look ups, which now incorporates Thomas’ footnote, will be sent to the EPDP Team for their review once the Team has signed off on the draft question in item 2 below.

  1.  Following the Legal Committee’s review of the Google Right to be Forgotten case, Legal Committee agreed to send an updated question (proposed by Becky) to the plenary team to review. New question reads as follows: In light of the finalized guidelines on the territorial scope of the GDPR and the ECJ opinion on regarding the right to be forgotten (Google case), are there any modifications you would propose to your previous memo on the territorial scope of the GDPR?
  2.  Legal Committee to review the updated memo summaries, which now include edits from Bird & Bird, and note any concerns by COB Friday, 6 December. If no objections are expressed, EPDP Support Staff will incorporate the edits and send to the plenary team for its review. (Please see attached.)
  3.  Volker to reformulate Priority 2 pseudonymous email address questions in advance of the next Legal Committee call, COB Monday, 16 December. (Support Staff to follow up with Volker directly regarding more specificity with this assignment.)
  4.  Matthew to redraft Priority 2 Legal vs. Natural Q1, Q5, and Q6 focusing on a clarifying question on what accuracy means in this context and who the accuracy rights flow to.
  5.  Becky to reach out to Tara re: Priority 2 Legal vs. Natural Q11 (submitted by SSAC) in order to provide a rationale for further discussion on the next Legal Committee Call.
Thank you.

Best regards,

Marika, Berry, and Caitlin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-legal/attachments/20191213/fa230db2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Proposed Legal Question - Accuracy & Legal vs Natural.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 18126 bytes
Desc: Proposed Legal Question - Accuracy & Legal vs Natural.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-legal/attachments/20191213/fa230db2/ProposedLegalQuestion-AccuracyLegalvsNatural-0001.docx>