[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] another document that might be of interest
Volker Greimann
vgreimann at key-systems.net
Fri Oct 27 09:41:17 UTC 2017
I absolutely agree with the basic premise of the statement.
Am 27.10.2017 um 01:57 schrieb consult at cgomes.com:
>
> Does anyone disagree with this: “the common goal here is to create
> policy that enables as robust and fully featured RDS as is possible
> without violating the law”?
>
> Chuck
>
> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 24, 2017 12:13 PM
> *To:* Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br>
> *Cc:* GNSO RDS PDP <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] another document that might be of
> interest
>
> The following statement troubles me greatly:
>
> The real battle here is between registrants in one side, and affected
> parties in the other. The balance always favoured affected parties
> from the beginning, and people got used to it; now that new laws are
> moving the needle towards registrants, there is resistance among those
> that got used to being favoured.
>
> This is a false dichotomy for several reasons. First, the "affected
> parties" are, in many cases, engaged in consumer protection,
> anti-abuse (of many different types), anti-counterfeiting and other
> activities that benefit registrants -- and more broadly, the security,
> stability of the Internet and trust in the Internet. Second, the
> "registrants" aren't really in the battle. We have people advocating
> for greatly expanded privacy protections, but they are not
> representing the registrants. They may sincerely believe the speak
> for the registrants, or believe they know what's best for the
> registrants -- or may just be privacy advocates. Whether privacy
> benefits the vast majority of registrants -- and whether the benefits
> outweigh the costs -- is very much an open question. (We've heard
> about some edge cases through anecdotes, but that is not indicative of
> anything but bits of the edge.)
>
> Setting "affected parties" against "registrants" is likely to keep us
> mired in an unproductive "locked-horns" mode. Maybe it benefits the
> privacy camp to delay until things fall apart, but that is not
> governance, and I truly hope that is not the agenda (I choose to
> believe we are just in the "messy and slow" mode of
> multistakeholderism -- unfortunately time and mess are not our friends
> here.)
>
> If the common goal here is to create policy that enables as robust and
> fully featured RDS as is possible without violating the law, then we
> could have a common goal.
>
> Figuring out how to deal with GDPR and what it really requires and
> looking for ways to live with it are not elements of denial. They are
> elements of analysis. Saying that GDPR is going to throw a big, wet
> blanket over everything is not analysis -- it is an attempt to wield
> the GDPR as the latest weapon in a long battle that has occupied ICANN
> (and many other spaces) for a long time. If we could turn our
> collective wisdom to problem solving, we could make some real headway
> here.
>
> Greg
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br
> <mailto:rubensk at nic.br>> wrote:
>
>
> > On Oct 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg
> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>> wrote:
> >
> > I would argue that their views are uninformed on other points of
> view or other changes that could be made that would satisfy their
> objectives which is similar but has important differences. So I
> disagree we are at the point we are violating EU law.
>
> Unfortunately we are already violating EU law. We are only not
> been sanctioned for it, because the law specify an adjusting
> period. Just read all the legal memos we already got.
>
> > EU DPAs may never change their mind.
>
> EU courts are a viable way to make government officials change
> their mind, if you think that's a matter of interpretation.
>
> > I’ll just get US law changed so that US entities offering
> domains have to list ownership information which means most if not
> all of the gTLDs I care about if not ICANN also.
>
> You know that Verisign, Facebook and Amazon already have
> subsidiaries in EU, right ? And they can move their contracts
> there if being in the US becomes a competitive handicap ?
>
> > We aren’t there yet because the DPAs are only starting to hear
> from us. Until now these discussions were populated by ICANN and
> registrars/registries who want whois to go away anyway.
>
> Frankly, registries and registrars couldn't care less about WHOIS.
> It's just a cost of doing business. The real battle here is
> between registrants in one side, and affected parties in the
> other. The balance always favoured affected parties from the
> beginning, and people got used to it; now that new laws are moving
> the needle towards registrants, there is resistance among those
> that got used to being favoured.
>
>
> >
> > This solitary focus on EU law presupposes that people believe
> that of the laws of the ~200 countries in the world, it is EU law
> that should be the controlling force of internet governance. Is
> that what you are saying?
>
>
> EU privacy law is just the first of many laws pointing in a
> similar direction, so it's not just a matter of following one
> jurisdiction, is about following a trend.
>
>
> Rubens
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-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-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20171027/30942de6/attachment.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list