[Gnso-epdp-team] Question in relation to BC comment on consent recommendation

[Alan Woods]

This strikes me as a apples / oranges type situation.

James' suggestion was for the ORG field, and was a concession as it
represents a relatively low risk, this does not flow to Registrant data.
There is a chasm of difference in consent for an ORG field and Consent for
the publication of all registrant data.

 I shall be blunt, it worries me that this distinction is not even
contemplated in the suggestion.

So, that would be a no for me. This simply ignores the serious concerns of
those parties bearing the risks, which have now been stated on the record,
umpteen times.

Alan




[image: Donuts Inc.] <http://donuts.domains>
Alan Woods
Senior Compliance & Policy Manager, Donuts Inc.
------------------------------
The Victorians,
15-18 Earlsfort Terrace
Dublin 2, County Dublin
Ireland

<https://www.facebook.com/donutstlds>   <https://twitter.com/DonutsInc>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/donuts-inc>

Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may
include privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Donuts
Inc. . Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than
the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to
this message and then delete it from your system. Thank you.


On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 5:24 PM Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
wrote:

> Margie, James, all,
>
>
>
> In relation to the BC comment:
>
>
>
> “*RECOMMENTATION  REGARDING CONSENT* Page 19 – Line 549  please delete
>  “as soon as commercially reasonable”.  Instead, this recommendation should
> track the dates for implementation under the transition plan that James and
> the registrars proposed in Toronto.”
>
>
>
> Could you please provide further details in relation to what is referred
> to with ‘the transition plan that James and the registrars proposed’ and
> how that would affect the recommendation?
>
>
>
> As a reminder, this new recommendation (modelled on the existing Temp Spec
> language) currently reads as follows:
>
>
>
> *“The EPDP Team recommends that, as soon as commercially reasonable,
> Registrar must provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to
> provide its Consent to** publish additional contact information”.*
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Caitlin, Berry and Marika
>
>
>
> *Marika Konings*
>
> *Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation
> for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *
>
> *Email: marika.konings at icann.org <marika.konings at icann.org>  *
>
>
>
> *Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO*
>
> *Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=5DXgId95wrCsHi--pxTiJD7bMB9r-T5ytCn7od3CF2Q&s=Cg5uQf0yAfw-qlFZ0WNBfsLmmtBNUiH0SuI6Vg-gXBQ&e=> and
> visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=5DXgId95wrCsHi--pxTiJD7bMB9r-T5ytCn7od3CF2Q&s=tT-E2RoAucUb3pfL9zmlbRdq1sytaEf765KOEkBVCjk&e=>. *
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/attachments/20190207/7d162864/attachment-0001.html>