[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] New version of Disclosure Framework document and Annex

Fri Apr 17 20:39:34 UTC 2015

Thanks Mary!

K

Kiran Malancharuvil
Internet Policy Counselor
MarkMonitor
415-419-9138 (m)

Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.

On Apr 17, 2015, at 1:38 PM, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>> wrote:

Hi Kiran and everyone,

My apologies; it must have gotten dropped from the last version I was using, so if that’s where the group has settled in respect of the attestation language for subsection (9), I will gladly put it back in. Thanks for spotting the mistake!

Cheers
Mary

Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4892
Email: mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>

From: Kiran Malancharuvil <Kiran.Malancharuvil at markmonitor.com<mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil at markmonitor.com>>
Date: Friday, April 17, 2015 at 15:31
To: Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>>, PPSAI WG <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
Subject: RE: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] New version of Disclosure Framework document and Annex

Hi Mary,

Thanks for circulating.

A quick question/concern about the “attestation” language contained in II(B)(9).  I thought we reached a different place of compromise than what is represented in the current language.

Here’s what the current document says:

            “(9) Where the signatory is not the rights holder, an officer of the rights holder (if a corporate entity) or an attorney of the rights holder, the Provider may request, and the Requestor shall provide, sufficient proof of authorization.”

Val Sherman originally proposed some language which further clarified when, and under what circumstances the Provider may request said authorization.  That was edited by Kathy and the resulting language from Kathy was a great place to be in my opinion.  That looked something like this:

“(9) Where the signatory is not the rights holder, an officer of the rights holder (if a corporate entity) or an attorney of the rights holder, and the Provider has a reasonable basis to believe that the Requestor is unauthorized to act on behalf of the rights holder or seeks to verify a new or unknown requestor, the Provider may request, and the Requestor shall provide, sufficient proof of authority.”

Since that language came from Kathy and represents a point of compromise, can we leave it in?  I’m not sure I understand how it dropped in the first place.  There doesn’t seem to be any clash between this language and the desire of Providers to request information from requestors that they do not  know.

Thanks!

Best,

Kiran

Kiran Malancharuvil
Policy Counselor
MarkMonitor
415.222.8318 (t)
415.419.9138 (m)
www.markmonitor.com<http://www.markmonitor.com/>

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 Mary Wong
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:10 PM
To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] New version of Disclosure Framework document and Annex

Hello everyone,

As discussed on the WG call earlier this week and as reflected in the latest version of our Work Plan (attached), we are sending you the latest version of the Disclosure Framework document and associated Annex, in the hope that between now and our next call we can iron out the remaining points of difference or uncertainty, especially on Section III.C and the Annex. In these latest versions, we have accepted the changes up to and including those that were presented for WG discussion up to this past Tuesday (including on attestation); you will see that we have also done the following:

  *   Moved up the automation language (with a slight tweak to the “human review” phrasing to reflect the WG discussion of 7 April);
  *   Retained the last version of the language in III.C(2) & (3) as well as added – as an alternative for discussion – Val’s latest suggested language for the same;
  *   Used Todd’s latest suggestion (with a slight change to the pretext phrasing) in III.C(5); and
  *   Tried to clarify the Annex in line with the WG discussion this week.

Please use these latest documents in continuing the on-list discussions and in preparation for our next WG call on Tuesday.

Thanks and cheers
Mary

Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4892
Email: mary.wong at icann.org<mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>

_______________________________________________
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