[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] What registrars must do (was Re: The principle for thin data)

[Marika Konings]

For those interested, please note that a public comment forum is currently open to obtain community input on the effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law (WHOIS Procedure), which was recently revised to incorporate an "Alternative Trigger," in addition to the existing trigger to invoke the procedure (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en). Comments may be submitted until 7 July.

Best regards,

Marika

From: <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 08:45
To: Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Cc: "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] What registrars must do (was Re: The principle for thin data)

Um, well, there is a procedure for handling WHOIS conflicts with local law that is out there.  The baseline position appears to be break the law and we will tell you how to explain it, even evade sanctions.

See https://whois.icann.org/en/revised-icann-procedure-handling-whois-conflicts-privacy-law.

Since I began to following these matters from the At-Large side in 2008, I have held this posture to be cockeyed, designed to make a priori scofflaws of registrars and a generator of work for lawyers.

So you know, I hold the view that one existential attribute of ICANN is to make work for lawyers. But truth be know if I had a sign hung I would be applauding them for gutsy stewardship.

-Carlton




==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 4:10 AM, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>> wrote:


Am 02.06.2017 um 18:17 schrieb Andrew Sullivan:
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 07:00:23PM +0300, jonathan matkowsky wrote:
"3.7.2 Registrar shall abide by applicable laws and governmental
regulations."  Applicable laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
​We should keep this in mind.
Yes.  Also, I don't know why we have to have an opinion on what
registrars or registries must do overall.  What we need to do, as far
as I can tell, is understand what the data is and what it is collected
for, and then propose a policy that makes it _possible_ for registrars
and registries to conform with their local laws.  No?
The main issue is that ICANN has no working process in place for a contracted party to show it has an issue with local laws that can be reasonably invoked before getting called on it by local authorities, e.g. being sued or fined. So we need the excemptions baked into the policy to be safe down the road.

"Just deal with that on your own later!" is not an acceptable result.

As a non-European leader recently put it: "No deal is better than a bad deal!"

Best,
Volker

_______________________________________________
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/afa0742c/attachment-0001.html>