[Gnso-epdp-team] High-level notes and action items - EPDP Team F2F - 9-11 September

Ayden Férdeline icann at ferdeline.com
Sat Sep 14 21:42:58 UTC 2019

Thanks Alan, I think your recollection is correct, but I personally found that response from ICANN Org to be unsatisfactory.

Before these questions are being shared with any third party, I think we as a chartered working group should be able to review them so that we have a fuller understanding of what discussions are taking place that could potentially impact our work.

I think this is particularly important given Elena herself expressed discomfort with the way in which the questions were worded. If ICANN staff are not fully comfortable with the questions, I think we should be able to read through them ASAP and to offer speedy input on suggested improvements or revisions.

I appreciate the questions are still a working document, and it's with that understanding that we would be offering suggested improvements - with a vision only to making sure we get information back that is actionable and useful for us as a working group.

Best wishes, Ayden

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, 14 September 2019 22:14, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

> My recollection is that Elena said that she did
> not feel comfortable sharing the memo now, prior
> to consulting with the EU folks who are helping
> them, but would share it with us once that is
> done and prior to submitting to the EDPB.
> Alan
> At 12/09/2019 09:07 PM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> > Also, I appreciate that it was not agreed as an
> > action item, but is there any way in which we
> > might be able to keep an open dialogue with the
> > Strawberry Team and - importantly - to see their
> > questions they plan to submit to the European
> > Data Protection Board before they are submitted
> > to any external party? I think we can all
> > appreciate they would be in draft form - that's
> > why we would like to help get the wording (and
> > sentiment) correct, and to avoid reputational
> > damage to ICANN if the wrong questions are
> > asked. I realise this was requested already, and
> > there was pushback from the Strawberry Team, but
> > I think it's important and inconsistent with
> > ICANN's stated commitments to transparency that
> > we are all ignorant as to what is being asked
> > that has a high potential to impact our work.

More information about the Gnso-epdp-team mailing list