[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Proposal contactability

Williams, Todd Todd.Williams at turner.com
Fri Aug 15 18:39:31 UTC 2014 

Thank you for this proposal Volker - very useful for moving the discussion ahead, as you noted.  There's quite a bit to unpack here, so let me take one specific part of it while reserving comment/judgment on the rest; specifically, this sentence:

"Service Provider may refuse to forward spam, duplicate messages, purchase or business inquiries, harrassing communications, anonymous communications and/or unwanted communications."

Of course, saying that a Service Provider may refuse to forward certain enumerated categories of communications implies that the Service Provider may not refuse to forward a communication that does not fall into one of those enumerated categories.  So as I read it (and correct me if this is wrong), that seems consistent with Option #1 from the attached.  In fact, it simply seems to be a further elucidation of the term "abusive communications" from Option 1; if it was a redline, it would read:

"A provider must relay all electronic requests received (including emails and via web forms), but may implement commercially reasonable safeguards (including CAPTCHA) to filter out spam, and other forms of abusive communications. duplicate messages, purchase or business inquiries, harassing communications, anonymous communications and/or unwanted communications."

Assuming that reading is correct, then I think what we'd be left to debate as a working group would be: what enumerated exceptions (to the general default rule of relay) do we think are appropriate?  My main thought is only that notices that include a legal claim should not be included among those enumerated exceptions.  But beyond that, here are some initial thoughts on each of the exceptions that you've proposed (again, all subject to further discussion):


·         Spam: I think we all agree on that.

·         Duplicate messages: my only question on this is how is it defined?  A certain number of messages from the same sender within a defined timeframe (e.g., 24 hours)?

·         Purchase or business inquiries: I confess that I don't quite understand this one.  What is the rationale for this exception?  Wouldn't the Beneficial Owner want to receive these?

·         Harassing communications: again, my question would be how is "harassing" defined?

·         Anonymous communications: I don't necessarily have a problem with this.

·         Unwanted communications: I think this one is the most problematic exception proposed, and is a non-starter, for several reasons, at least one of which is that it would seem to include notices that include a legal claim (because who really "wants" to receive those?).

Those are my initial thoughts at least; I look forward to hearing what everybody else thinks.

Todd.

From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 5:28 AM
To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Proposal contactability

As Susan and Steve have repeatedly asked what my proposal would be to ensure contactability of the beneficial owner/registrant.

As a basis, a spec derivative of the WAP spec to the RAA would have to be developed. I took the liberty of modifying the WAP for this purpose as a basis for discussion.
This would bring the obligation of the privacy service provider to validate and verify the contact details to the same level of that of the registrar, thus ensuring the Service Provider has either accurate details or a duty to verify and validate.

Now, I would agree that some level of a contactibility guarantee is warranted. This could be something to this tune, as a basis for discussion:

"Service Provider are required provide a means for third parties to directly or indirectly communicate with the Beneficial Owner. Such means may include any of the following:
a) providing a postal mail forwarding address
b) providing a collective email point of contact for all domain names under the Service (such as abuse at service.provider<mailto:abuse at service.provider>)
c) providing an individual email point of contact for each domain name under the Service (such as string at domain.name<mailto:string at domain.name> or domain.name at service.provider<mailto:domain.name at service.provider>)
...
...

Service Provider must inform potential complainants about the accepted means of communication on its website. Service provider may refuse to forward, process or even accept communications sent by a non-accepted means of communication. In case forwarding of postal communications is offered, Service Provider may charge complainant reasonable handling fees and costs for the forwarding service and defer the forwarding of communications until payment is received.

Service Provider may refuse to forward spam, duplicate messages, purchase or business inquiries, harrassing communications, anonymous communications and/or unwanted communications. Service Provider is authorized to update or modify the means of communication from time to time. Service Provider is authorized to blacklist complainants with a history of abusing the provided means of communication."

All subject to further discussion, ofc.

I realize this draft goes into detail more than we should in this WG, but having been asked for a proposal, I felt it necessary in order to move the discussion ahead.
Terms:
Service Provider - Privacy/Proxy Service Provider
Beneficial Owner - Replaces "Registrant"
filter - not deliver to Beneficial owner
Service - the privacy/proxy services


--

Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.



Mit freundlichen Grüßen,



Volker A. Greimann

- Rechtsabteilung -



Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>



Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>



Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin

Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534



Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>



Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.



--------------------------------------------



Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.



Best regards,



Volker A. Greimann

- legal department -



Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>



Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>



CEO: Alexander Siffrin

Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534



Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>



This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140815/9a03f081/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Summary Status of WG Discussions on E-1 7 August.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 22453 bytes
Desc: Summary Status of WG Discussions on E-1 7 August.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140815/9a03f081/SummaryStatusofWGDiscussionsonE-17August-0001.docx>

More information about the Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list