[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Legal Opinion on GDPR - Part 1

[John Bambenek]

Said better than I have. The way forward greatly depends on how you frame the question. And that question is more profound than open whois. 

--
John Bambenek

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 17:19, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
> 
> I am curious as to how the questions are being framed.   Who is the client, ICANN the MS body, ICANN the CEO and staff (who have been found to be a co-controller and therefore have an interest in avoiding fines) or ICANN the Board.
> 
> There are different interests at stake here, I  think it would be useful to get a fuller understanding of how Teresa Swineheart is handling the development of questions.
> 
> Stephanie Perrin
> 
>> On 2017-10-19 10:43, Chuck wrote:
>> Greg,
>> 
>> Having just finished reading the Hamilton memo, I don't understand why you
>> think the WG needs a presentation?  What would a presentation from Teresa or
>> other ICANN staff person provide us that we couldn't get from the memo
>> itself and other sources such as the ICANN Blog, etc.?
>> 
>> Can you identify any advice from Hamilton that would supplant work we have
>> been doing?  If so, please identify it.
>> 
>> In my opinion:
>> -	The advice of ways forward fits nicely into our policy development
>> processes.
>> -	The Hamilton Memo confirms much of what we already heard from the DP
>> experts and Wilson Sonsini so we now have it from three separate sources.
>> -	You are absolutely that we "need to understand and track the legal
>> advice being made" and that it overlaps what we are doing but I think that
>> will help us.
>> 
>> Chuck
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Greg Aaron [mailto:gca at icginc.com] 
>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 7:25 AM
>> To: Chuck <consult at cgomes.com>; 'Alan Greenberg' <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>;
>> 'GNSO RDS PDP' <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>> Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Legal Opinion on GDPR - Part 1
>> 
>> Dear WG  leadership:
>> 
>> As we expected, this ICANN Org effort will have a profound effect on our
>> work.  We will need to understand and track the legal advice being made,
>> which overlaps with and in some places may supplant work we have been doing.
>> And the memo's "Finding New Ways Forward"  section (3.9) provides advice for
>> the policy-making process.  Clearly our WG needs (deserves) a presentation
>> at Abu Dhabi from Teresa Swinehart, who is heading up this effort. 
>> 
>> Could this be done at the WG meeting on Wednesday 1 November?  
>> Wednesday will be better attended, both in-person and remotely.  (Some
>> members may still be in transit during the WG's early Saturday morning
>> meeting.  And the Saturday meeting is at a challenging time for those
>> participating remotely -- ~6:30 a.m. Saturday morning in Europe /  12:30
>> a.m. Saturday East Coast USA.)
>> 
>> As part of the briefing, it would be good to hear about this effort's
>> schedule, workplan, and immediate next steps.  The memo says: "We intend to
>> provide a series of memorandums, which will address different aspects of the
>> issue and where the  scope and topics of each such memorandum will be
>> discussed and agreed with ICANN. We understand that ICANN intends to make
>> each memorandum publicly available."
>> 
>> All best,
>> --Greg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Chuck
>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 8:51 AM
>> To: 'Alan Greenberg' <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>; 'GNSO RDS PDP'
>> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Legal Opinion on GDPR - Part 1
>> 
>> I want to call attention to the following paragraph:
>> 
>> "The memo highlights the complexity of these issues in the domain name
>> space, and concludes that the current open, publicly available WHOIS
>> services cannot remain unchanged. The WHOIS system has to become adaptable
>> to address the GDPR from the European perspective, as well as other changing
>> regulations around the world."
>> 
>> After input from Data Protection experts, the Wilson Sonsini memo and now
>> this memo, do any in the WG disagree with this statement?
>> 
>> Chuck
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 5:04 AM
>> To: GNSO RDS PDP <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Legal Opinion on GDPR - Part 1
>> 
>> Full Blog post is at
>> https://www.icann.org/news/blog/data-protection-and-privacy-update.  Alan
>> 
>> At 19/10/2017 12:23 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>>> Perhaps it has already been posted, but if not, ICANN has received the 
>>> first part of the independent legal analysis of the GDPR in relation to 
>>> WHOIS that had been commissioned.
>>> 
>>> It can be found at
>>> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdpr-memorandum-part1-16oct
>>> 17-e
>> n.pdf.
>>> Alan
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>> 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
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>> 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
> 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/20171020/3c0206c2/attachment.html>