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

Fri Mar 5 23:16:44 UTC 2021

Happy to include this question in the Legal Team review but absent strong
and reasoned explanation will not hold up sending off the agreed upon
questions to B&B.  This has no bearing on the merit of the question, which
I am happy to discuss once we get through the existing questions.  But we
must get something into B&B's hands now to get advice in a timely fashion.

As COB approaches please note that I have accepted changes proposed by
Brian and Volker, which in my opinion clarify and do not change the
questions.

B

On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 5:16 PM Margie Milam <margiemilam at fb.com> wrote:

> 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 i*n 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> 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
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Melina
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-epdp-legal <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
> *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.
>
>
>
> 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>
> *Date: *Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 9:55 PM
> *To: *"gnso-epdp-legal at icann.org" <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
> 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) and
> the website Terms of Service (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/e84adbe9/attachment-0001.html>