[Gnso-epdp-team] For your review: updated recommendations 10, 11, 12
kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Fri Feb 8 15:48:58 UTC 2019
I am also interested to know how the process apply to Non EU?
There is no clear indication nor it has been referred as a process to be pursued in Phase 2
Moreover , it us not clear when phase II will begin and when ended .
The transition aspect between two phases are also unknown
I seriously and formally ask Kurt to address this matter
Sent from my iPhone
> On 8 Feb 2019, at 15:21, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
> I agree. We do not yet fully understand the process for non-EU LEA access to data and Process 2 had no such limitations.
> At 07/02/2019 03:52 PM, Heineman, Ashley wrote:
>> Thanks for this and hello colleagues,
>> After further reflection on todayâ€™s discussion of Recommendation 12 and the new text proposed by Thomas, I believe this language should be deleted. Specifically –“ â€œThese criteria are applicable to disclosure requests relating to civil claims. LEA requests will be handled according to applicable laws.â€
>> While I am extremely pleased with the state of the Recommendation overall, this new insertion has not been fully considered and I believe is misplaced.
>> I understand and am sympathetic to Thomasâ€™ concerns, but that being said, I believe those concerns are best addressed elsewhere. The singular intent of Recommendation 12 is to provide clarity around the process and expectations of reasonable lawful disclosure in terms of making requests. The recommendation attempts to ensure that expectations are set for how to submit requests and in what fashion those requests will be handled once received. The Recommendation does NOT assume that disclosure will be made and, further, it isnâ€™t even contemplated how and on what basis a decision for disclosing (or not) will be made. Those issues are to be dealt with in Phase 2 and/or otherwise in a specific access discussion.
>> Iâ€™m thus concerned that by explicitly limiting this recommendation to civil requests will unfairly and unnecessarily remove the benefits of process clarity for LEA.
>> In light of these concerns, I strongly recommend the deletion of this text. Thomasâ€™ legitimate concerns should then be taken up and addressed in our Phase 2 work.
>> 202 482 0298
>> From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Caitlin Tubergen
>> Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 3:26 PM
>> To: gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
>> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] For your review: updated recommendations 10, 11, 12
>> Dear EPDP Team:
>> Attached, please find the updated recommendations. The updates are the result of todayâ€™s EPDP Team discussion
>> As always, please feel free to flag any text that you believe does not represent what the Team agreed to.
>> Best regards,
>> Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
>> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
>> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gnso-epdp-team