[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] FW: Draft Grouping of Charter Questions - some edits
Volker Greimann
vgreimann at key-systems.net
Wed Jan 8 12:22:33 UTC 2014
Hi all,
to respond to John's comments:
>
> * When an allegation of illegal activity is submitted to the p/p
> service provider, it is important to understand that it may be
> coming from a victim of the crime.
>
When an allegation of illegal activity is submitted, it is important to
understand that it may be coming from someone who merely claims to vbe a
victim of a crime, but is in fact not. The purposes for which someone
may want to see the underlying registrant data are multifold and many of
them are with the intent to later harass the privacy service user, or
worse. We must remember in such cases that there may be a very good
reason why the registrant has opted for whois privacy. It may therefore
be essential for the registrant to know who has inquired to have
messages relayed or to have the private data revealed to be able to help
the p/p service provider better understand the situation. While I
understand there may be cases where a complainant may also have an
interest in keeping his identity hidden, he can avail himself of a
multitude of methods to ensure this prior to launching the complaint. I
do not see this question as actually necessary.
>
> * Similarly, I proposed an additional question regarding whether, if
> disclosure to the registrant is not required, it should be
> permitted even if law enforcement explains that it will jeopardize
> an investigation. The rationale for this is simply that in many
> cases -- in the offline world, as the online world -- disclosing
> this information puts a legitimate investigation at risk.
>
Agreed, but not all law enforcement is created equal. Basically, I would
hold that the p/p operator is unable to determine if an investigation is
legitimate or not. Therefore, the only law enforcement that should
receive special priviledges should be the law enforcement of the country
where the p/p service is based or operates from.
No such privileges should be extended to private organizations, no
matter how well intentioned unless they are specially authorized be the
laws of the country of the p/p operator.
>
> * The proposed questions pertaining to jurisdiction are based on the
> problem I identified (and Gema did, as well) in our earlier
> emails. I do feel that the way I've written the questions can be
> clarified and improved, so I welcome anyone who would like to give
> that a shot.
> * Similarly, we propose a question that relates to the other
> business interests controlled by or affiliated with the p/p
> service. To explain this, we have sometimes seen that the criminal
> organization "is" the privacy/proxy service. (Currently, of
> course, there is no accreditation scheme, but the fact remains
> that is what we see, and I am happy to provide examples if need
> be.) To be very specific, we know of circumstances where a rogue
> Internet pharmacy network operates its own "proxy" service, or
> alternatively, the proxy service -- that is, the individuals who
> operate it -- also operates as affiliate marketers for rogue
> networks, using their own privacy/proxy service primarily for
> their own illegal purposes.
>
Under an accreditation scheme, if actual collusion can be proven, that
should probably be a reason to pull the accreditation of the service.
>
> Finally, although I unfortunately had to miss the call this morning, I
> believe that some of the comments may have argued that registrars (or,
> ICANN) should not have to address criminal jurisdictional issues (that
> is, multi-jurisdictional complexities). I'd note that banks, credit
> card networks and search engine ad programs regularly have to address
> precisely the same multi-jurisdictional questions relating to criminal
> activity on their platform and do not simply leave it to law
> enforcement. I would argue that there is no reason to consider
> registrars a special case that are for some reason exempt from having
> to address the same issues that companies in the financial and
> advertising sectors have had to address, and have by and large done so
> quite competently. I am confident that the registrar community can
> competently do the same.
John, please note that registrars are not (and are nothing like) banks
or credit card networks, which are highly regulated by national laws.
And even banks take action only based upon legal requirements, law
enforcement requests or court orders. To demand any more for less
regulated private companies is frankly ridiculous.
Your new questions as to related to asking them about applicability of
foreign law enforcement requests sound like an unrealistic wish list at
best. Providers bowing to every whim of foreign law enforcement or
organizations without actual legal authority would expose themsemselves
to severe legal liability.
Best,
Volker
>
> Thank you for the opportunity to provide this input, and I welcome any
> suggestions as to how our suggestions can be improved or refined.
>
> John Horton
> President, LegitScript
>
>
> *FollowLegitScript*: LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com> | Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript> | Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/legitscript> | YouTube
> <https://www.youtube.com/user/LegitScript> | _Blog
> <http://blog.legitscript.com>_ |Google+
> <https://plus.google.com/112436813474708014933/posts>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Marika Konings
> <marika.konings at icann.org <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com
> <mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>>
> Date: Tuesday 7 January 2014 16:38
> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org
> <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
> Subject: Fwd: Draft Grouping of Charter Questions - some edits
>
> Hi Marika, could you post this to our working group?
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Draft Grouping of Charter Questions - some edits
> Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:35:02 -0500
> From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com>
> <mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>
> To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
>
>
> Hi All,
> Hopefully you have seen the proposed edits I just to the SG-C
> Input Template (I haven't seen them posted).
>
> Attached here are some inputs to the Draft Grouping of Charter
> Questions - with an organizational-type perspective being added.
> The world is really not just commercial/individual, but truly one
> of commercial, noncommercial and individual (as ICANN has
> organized its non-contracted parties).
>
> For a religious group, political group, hobby group, dissident
> group may be organized as a limited liability company to protect
> the members in case someone falls in the building, but that does
> not nullify the fact that the group is engaged primarily and fully
> in noncommercial speech (as the wide array of members of NCSG show).
>
> Again edits highlighted and hopefully visible. I would like to see
> much more discussion on this issue in our next meeting and over
> the list.
> Best,
> Kathy
>
> :
>>
>> I will miss the first 30 minutes due to another obligation, but
>> will join as soon as I can.
>>
>> *From:*gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>
>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of
>> *Marika Konings
>> *Sent:* Monday, January 06, 2014 4:30 AM
>> *To:* gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>> *Subject:* [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Proposed Agenda - PPSAI PDP WG Meeting
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Please find below the proposed agenda for the next PPSAI PDP WG
>> meeting (Tuesday 7 January at 15.00 UTC).
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Marika
>>
>> *Proposed Agenda -- PPSAI PDP WG Meeting -- 7 January 2013*
>>
>> 1.Roll Call / SOI
>>
>> 2.Review & finalise SG/C Template (see revised version attached)
>>
>> 3.Review & finalise SO/AC Outreach Letter (see revised version
>> attached)
>>
>> 4.Input to EWG Survey (see attached)
>>
>> 5.Update on WG members survey (to participate, please go to
>> https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/86N33WX)
>>
>> 6.Review proposed charter question groupings (see latest version
>> attached)
>>
>> 7.Next steps & confirm next meeting
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
--
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
Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
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
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
Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
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
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/20140108/0b9e219a/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
mailing list