[Gnso-epdp-team] For your review: purposes and user groups

[Sarah Wyld]

Sent on behalf of the CPH team:


Hello Team,

Thanks for laying out these suggested options for how to approach the
Purposes and User Groups.

We note that this would not generally be our preferred approach for
addressing open issues, but because we did significant work on these
topics already in plenary, we think that we can agree with the proposal
for how to conclude these questions.

For User Groups, the building block in combination with the
Accreditation building block should be sufficient to identify users and
group them appropriately; we can therefore support the suggested text in
the second bullet point.

For Purposes, we agree that no further work is required, and again
support the second bullet point in that section.  

Yours Truly,

The CPH Team



-- 
Sarah Wyld
Domains Product Team
Tucows
+1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392

 

On 11/21/2019 6:02 PM, Caitlin Tubergen wrote:
>
> Dear EPDP Team:
>
>  
>
> Under the Team’s current review schedule, no time has been set aside
> to further discuss purposes and user groups. To that end, we wanted to
> test a proposed approach to these building blocks as outlined in the
> list of issues that was shared prior to ICANN66.
>
>  
>
> User groups:
>
>   * Consider whether or not a set of user groups needs to be developed
>     – is this already addressed through the accreditation recommendations?
>   * If this is considered addressed as a result of the accreditation
>     recommendations, consider the following text:
>
> “The EPDP Team expects that the question of user groups will be
> addressed through the accreditation policy; specifically, all
> requestors will need to be accredited, and accreditation will include
> identity verification, which may include user category/categories.” 
>
>  
>
> Purposes:
>
>   * Consider purpose 2 and the previous agreement: “The EPDP Team
>     agreed to consider at a later stage in the process whether an
>     ICANN purpose for disclosure is necessary and/or desirable”. Has a
>     later stage arrived, or is further time needed? Is this a question
>     to be raised as part of the public comment period on the Initial
>     Report?
>   * Consider also whether a set of pre-determined purposes needs to be
>     developed that third-party requestors can provide. If this is not
>     deemed necessary at this stage, consider the following text:
>
> “As identified in building block a) criteria and content of requests,
> each request must include information about the legal rights of the
> requestor specific to the request and/or specific rationale and/or
> justification for the request, e.g. What is the basis or reason for
> the request; Why is it necessary for the requestor to ask for this
> data? The EPDP Team expects that over time, the entity responsible for
> receiving requests will be able to identify certain patterns that
> could result in the development of a preset list of rationales and/or
> justifications that a requestor can select from, while always
> maintaining the option for the requestor to provide this information
> in free form”.
>
>  
>
> Based on your feedback, the leadership team will determine when to
> discuss this further or whether the proposed approach has sufficient
> support to be incorporated in the draft Initial Report.
>
>  
>
> Please provide feedback by *Thursday, 28 November*.
>
>  
>
> Best regards,
>
>  
>
> Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
>
>  
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
> _______________________________________________
> 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-team/attachments/20191126/b40cfe94/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/attachments/20191126/b40cfe94/signature-0001.asc>