[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Proposed Agenda for RDS PDP WG Meeting - Tuesday 6 June

Tue Jun 6 12:27:36 UTC 2017

Jonathan

ICANN Staff has identified several law firms that have experience and a good track record.

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

From: <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of jonathan matkowsky <jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net>
Date: Tuesday 6 June 2017 at 06:35
To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
Cc: "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Proposed Agenda for RDS PDP WG Meeting - Tuesday 6 June

Greg raises a very important point. Lawyers serve different roles in different situations. Here, we should not be seeking a lawyer to serve as an advocate in this situation for any member's goals, but an advisor to let us know whether certain options are well within a reasonable degree of business risk for the group, slightly more risky, or have a higher than the usual degree of business risk--all based on applicable law. We need someone that has a lot of experience with various privacy laws in different jurisdictions specifically as it applies to the Internet. If we need recommendations, let me know.

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:
The goal of good legal advice should be to give the client (here, the group developing policy) a solution that offers the most latitude to achieve their objectives while complying with the law.  If the goal is to constrain the RDS beyond the minimum constraints of the law, that is not good legal advice to a group trying to develop policy recommendations. It might achieve some other objective, but it is not an objective related to legal advice.

Greg

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:

Oh, I accept that we are going to have to get outside counsel.  I am just putting a marker in, that we probably have different views on how to seek advice from counsel.  Our goals are different.

Stephanie

On 2017-06-05 19:18, Adam Lanier wrote:
Stephanie,

Do you have an alternate suggestion then? It sounds as if you think hiring outside council may not be a good idea.

On another note, it seems to me that there is considerable legal and technical talent already in this WG.  Does everyone feel that there is no way for us to educate each other and fill in at least some of the gaps?

Adam Lanier | Director Technical Operations | Clearnetwork | alanier at clearnetwork.com<mailto:alanier at voyantinc.com> | +1 732-335-1500 ext. 525<tel:(732)%20335-1500>

On Jun 5, 2017, at 6:42 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:

I certainly agree with Andrew that I at least have a technical expertise gap, not so much a public policy and legal gap.  I would also add that the risk in hiring legal counsel to advise us, is that we will not agree on what questions to ask.  For those of us advocating the public policy goals of human rights and protection of data, it will hardly be satisfactory to hire a "privacy goalie" who will be trying to find ways to deflect implementing more stringent data protection.  We have different goals here.

Stephanie

On 2017-06-05 18:28, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

Hi,

On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 11:16:56PM +0100, Paul Keating wrote:

I would like to reiterate my request that we attempt to formally engage counsel for the e.g. Who can provide meaningful legal advice.

While I am by no means opposed to that suggestion, I worry about two

issues: (1) that it'll blow such budget as we maybe have and (2) that

once we do this we ought also to engage (formally) technical expertise

and so on.  Without wishing to impugn anyone, I will confess that in

this group gaps in legal knowledge are way less obvious to me than

gaps in technical knowledge.  This is doubtless because of my own

background, and not the relative desity of knowledge gaps.

Best regards,

A

_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170606/7c5a7aa5/attachment-0001.html>