[Gnso-epdp-legal] For Legal Committee Review: Consolidated Legal v. Natural questions

Fri Mar 5 22:16:16 UTC 2021

I support Melina’s request and note its consistent with our discussions in the plenary regarding considering a policy that examines whether there is personal data included in the WHOIS associated with domain names registered to legal entities.

Margie

From: Gnso-epdp-legal <gnso-epdp-legal-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of STROUNGI Melina via Gnso-epdp-legal <gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org>
Reply-To: STROUNGI Melina <Melina.STROUNGI at ec.europa.eu>
Date: Friday, March 5, 2021 at 9:27 AM
To: Becky Burr <becky.burr at board.icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org" <gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-legal] For Legal Committee Review: Consolidated Legal v. Natural questions

Dear Becky,

thank you for your email. I fully understand your concerns. Just to point out that this is not an entirely new question, but a question that is already introduced in the group, including our last Legal Committee meeting. No one raised an objection and I know a lot of colleagues find it a useful question. Moreover this tiered approach is part of the 1a proposal, and has been discussed several times during the EPDP meetings.

It further aims at addressing some CP’s concerns, namely that a 1-step approach of distinguishing only between legal and natural persons does not take into account the nature of data of legal persons that could be under certain circumstances personal.

I agree with you and to me it is also clear that this 2-step approach would be fully compliant with the GDPR; however, it may not be that clear to everyone. So in order to ease everyone’s concerns and obtain some legal clarity, I believe it would be beneficial to the progress of the discussions to have also B&B opine on this issue and advise on whether the 2-step approach would further minimize any risks as compared to the 1-step approach.

I am not sure what is the timeline of sending the questions to B&B but I trust you on finding the moment you believe is right of adding this to the questions we will submit to B&B.

Hope this was clear.

Have a nice evening.

Kind regards,
Melina

From: Becky Burr <becky.burr at board.icann.org>
Sent: Friday, March 5, 2021 5:48 PM
To: STROUNGI Melina (CNECT) <Melina.STROUNGI at ec.europa.eu>
Cc: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen at icann.org>; gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-legal] For Legal Committee Review: Consolidated Legal v. Natural questions

Thank you Melina.  As an initial matter, I am reluctant to introduce entirely new questions into the mix at this point, given the fact that our work is a dependency for the work of the plenary.  I propose that we consider your additional questions after we have finished our work on all of the questions in the original pipeline.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure I follow your question.  You ask about a tiered approach:

  1.  distinguish between legal and natural person registrations initially and publish nothing associated with a natural person registration
  2.  look at the data associated with a legal person registration and publish only non-personal data,
  3.  Give legal persons the opportunity to publish
Why would we need legal advice with respect to this question?  If I have understood the approach you suggest, it seems to me that (i) it would be entirely legal under GDPR and (ii) implementation issues (e.g., related to consent, etc.) are addressed in the other questions we are asking.  Could you clarify this issue for the group in a separate email and not in the doc?

Also, in order to make suggestions in Docs, there is a drop-down tab in the upper right hand of the bar - you should set the tab to "suggesting mode" in order to make suggested edits for the group's consideration.

Best,
Becky

On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 10:04 AM STROUNGI Melina via Gnso-epdp-legal <gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org>> wrote:
Dear EPDP colleagues,

Just to let you know that I introduced an edit (in highlight as for some reason track changes seem to be disabled).

As I did not want to alter the substance of the questions already raised I preferred to raise this question separately (it is the same question I raised during our meetings and there was no objection from anyone; nor do I see a harm in asking. On the contrary, it could help clarify).

Hope this is fine.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CqczmN_ShkDFgx05q8AyUX5iDM2u5dul/edit<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CqczmN_ShkDFgx05q8AyUX5iDM2u5dul/edit>

Best regards,
Melina

From: Gnso-epdp-legal <gnso-epdp-legal-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-legal-bounces at icann.org>> On Behalf Of Caitlin Tubergen via Gnso-epdp-legal
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 2:57 PM
To: gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-legal] For Legal Committee Review: Consolidated Legal v. Natural questions

Apologies for the additional email. Please use this link for the consolidated L v. N questions: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CqczmN_ShkDFgx05q8AyUX5iDM2u5dul/edit<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CqczmN_ShkDFgx05q8AyUX5iDM2u5dul/edit>.

As noted below, please respond no later than COB on Friday 5 March if you strongly object to the revised questions.  Absent reasoned objection, we will notify the plenary of our intent to submit those questions to B&B.

Best regards,

Berry, Marika, and Caitlin

From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen at icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen at icann.org>>
Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 9:55 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org>" <gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org>>
Subject: For Legal Committee Review: Consolidated Legal v. Natural questions

Sent on behalf of Becky Burr:

Dear ePDP Legal Team colleagues:

As promised, please find modest revisions to Questions 1-6 relating to Legal/Natural Person issues following our discussion today: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16SQJ3dfUuVKZJOQrKnBFqkUwmqIpQjCG/edit#<https://docs.google.com/document/d/16SQJ3dfUuVKZJOQrKnBFqkUwmqIpQjCG/edit>.

With respect to reformatted questions 1 - 3, covering original questions 1-4, please respond no later than COB on Friday 5 March if you strongly object to the revised questions.  Absent reasoned objection, we will notify the plenary of our intent to submit those questions to B&B.

With respect to the reformatted question on EURid/RIPE-NCC, you will see that I have retained the background material on EURid and Article 16.  Please review and submit any comments by COB on Friday 5 March in preparation for a brief decisional conversation on Tuesday.

Thank you.

Becky
_______________________________________________
Gnso-epdp-legal mailing list
Gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-legal<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-legal>
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy<https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-legal/attachments/20210305/ca977a31/attachment-0001.html>