[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Using the GDPR as a basis for RDS Policy is backwards
John Horton
john.horton at legitscript.com
Wed Feb 14 21:37:40 UTC 2018
Michele,
One leading (US-based) registrar informed me that even though they could be
more granular if they wished to, they wanted to just extend the identical
(i.e., GDPR-level) protections to all registrants globally simply due to
"cost-benefit analysis" -- that it was more convenient for them and less
work. I personally do not consider that a valid justification, standing
alone. I do not wish any registrar to incur unreasonable costs, but a
registrar's profit margin goals should not drive policy.
John Horton
President and CEO, LegitScript
*Follow LegitScript*: LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com> | Facebook
<https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript> | Twitter
<https://twitter.com/legitscript> | *Blog <http://blog.legitscript.com/>*
| Newsletter <http://go.legitscript.com/Subscription-Management.html>
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <
michele at blacknight.com> wrote:
> John
>
>
>
> I cannot agree with either of your statements. Others have weighed in on
> the first one, so I won’t repeat what has been said.
>
>
>
> The second one is a mischaracterisation of what registrars (and
> registries) are dealing with, unless you consider protecting your business
> from breaking the law as an “objective”.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Michele
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> https://www.blacknight.com
>
> https://blacknight.blog /
>
> http://ceo.hosting/
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 <+353%2059%20918%203072>
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 <+353%2059%20918%203090>
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
>
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow, R93 X265
>
> ,Ireland Company No.: 370845
>
> *From: *gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of
> John Horton via gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Reply-To: *John Horton <john.horton at legitscript.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday 14 February 2018 at 20:08
> *To: *Chuck <consult at cgomes.com>
> *Cc: *RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Using the GDPR as a basis for RDS Policy
> is backwards
>
>
>
> Thanks, Chuck. I think whatever changes are required by the GDPR can be
> accomplished with changes that, in my view, do not constitute a fundamental
> change to Whois/RDS. Beyond what I think are non-fundamental changes
> relating to the GDPR, I do not believe that any changes are a "must." As to
> your question:
>
> - There is a limited set of registrants that is entitled to GDPR
> protection. There is a very large class of registrants that is not entitled
> to GDPR protection. There is disagreement about where this line is, but
> this seems to be something where consensus is possible and there's an
> objectively, legally correct answer.
> - It is possible to protect that subset of registrants through (e.g.)
> complimentary privacy protection, as well as some other limited policies
> granting access to the data for a legitimate purpose (etc., everything
> we've been discussing).
> - Whether a registrant is, in fact, an entity that is in the very
> limited class entitled to GDPR protection can be determined during the
> registration process, and ICANN policy can require registrars to add these
> fields to the registration process. Existing registrants can be asked to
> update their information.
> - Aside from the policies requiring that those additional data fields
> be collected during the registration process (e.g., are you an EU citizen
> and other relevant questions), and that if certain answers are "TRUE" then
> privacy protection is automatically granted, Whois would not change. Port
> 43 access would continue as is, and so on.
>
> I guess I would turn around and ask you and others if everyone agrees with
> these two statements:
>
> 1. The GDPR applies to, and is intended to benefit, a limited set of
> registrants.
> 2. Registrar convenience or business objectives is not a valid basis
> to support a policy change.
>
>
> John Horton
> President and CEO, LegitScript
>
> [image:
> https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B13GfLt8zwZJRXE5UTAtclVxdTg&revid=0B13GfLt8zwZJSG9zOUVwN1lFKzFrRVlnaWU0NGZ4RmdkUjg4PQ]
>
>
>
> *Follow* *Legit**Script*: LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com> | Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript> | Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/legitscript> | Blog <http://blog.legitscript.com/>
> | Newsletter <http://go.legitscript.com/Subscription-Management.html>
>
>
>
> [image:
> https://www.legitscript.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/LegitScript-Workplace.png][image:
> https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B13GfLt8zwZJTmNWbmcwOTVJMXc&revid=0B13GfLt8zwZJQlZWOXVGbG9acC9nRGhzdEkxclFJVytCWVNjPQ]
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:35 AM, Chuck <consult at cgomes.com> wrote:
>
> John,
>
>
>
> You said ‘no’ but your qualification says it needs to change, albeit in
> what you think is a minor change.
>
>
>
> Do you believe that changing the RDS to accommodate the GDPR is Europe is
> a minor tweak? If so, please tell me what that minor tweak is.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> *From:* John Horton [mailto:john.horton at legitscript.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 14, 2018 11:26 AM
> *To:* Chuck <consult at cgomes.com>
> *Cc:* Sara Bockey <sbockey at godaddy.com>; Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com>;
> RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Using the GDPR as a basis for RDS Policy
> is backwards
>
>
>
> Yes, I respectfully disagree with Sara's statement, Chuck. (With a small
> qualification.) I don't think you have consensus around that point, in my
> view. The qualification I'd make is: where there are specific regulatory
> reasons to either require or permit a change to existing Whois/RDS policy,
> provided that it's done in the most conservative way possible, I think
> that's reasonable to discuss. (The obvious example here is the GDPR.)
> Beyond that, I believe that one of the best alternatives that's
> (implicitly) presented so far is no change, as many (all?) of the proposed
> changes I've heard so far would be worse than the status quo.
>
>
>
> So do I believe it "must" change? No, aside from a very limited tweak due
> to some specific regulatory issues. Do I believe it could be improved, and
> that improvements are worth discussing? Yes. But the answer to your
> question is: Yes, there is someone on this working group who respectfully
> disagrees with Sara's statement.
>
>
> John Horton
> President and CEO, LegitScript
>
> [image:
> https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B13GfLt8zwZJRXE5UTAtclVxdTg&revid=0B13GfLt8zwZJSG9zOUVwN1lFKzFrRVlnaWU0NGZ4RmdkUjg4PQ]
>
>
>
> *Follow* *Legit**Script*: LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com> | Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript> | Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/legitscript> | Blog <http://blog.legitscript.com/>
> | Newsletter <http://go.legitscript.com/Subscription-Management.html>
>
>
>
> [image:
> https://www.legitscript.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/LegitScript-Workplace.png][image:
> https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B13GfLt8zwZJTmNWbmcwOTVJMXc&revid=0B13GfLt8zwZJQlZWOXVGbG9acC9nRGhzdEkxclFJVytCWVNjPQ]
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Chuck <consult at cgomes.com> wrote:
>
> Is there anyone in this WG who disagrees with Sara’s statement that ‘RDS
> must change’, understanding that we still have large differences of opinion
> regarding how to change it?
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Sara Bockey
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:22 AM
> *To:* Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com>; gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Using the GDPR as a basis for RDS Policy
> is backwards
>
>
>
> I agree with Steve and look forward to additional feedback from him.
>
>
>
> RDS must change. Discussions to the contrary are a waste of time.
>
>
>
> Sara
>
>
>
> *sara bockey*
>
> *sr. policy manager | **Go**Daddy™*
>
> *sbockey at godaddy.com* <sbockey at godaddy.com> *480-366-3616*
> <(480)%20366-3616>
>
> *skype: sbockey*
>
>
>
> *This email message and any attachments hereto is intended for use only by
> the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information. If
> you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender
> and permanently delete the original and any copy of this message and its
> attachments.*
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of
> Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 9:27 AM
> *To: *"gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Using the GDPR as a basis for RDS Policy is
> backwards
>
>
>
> I am only partially up to speed on the state of discussion within this WG,
> but I have been following the RDS situation for several years. In my view,
> the current focus on GDPR, while understandable because of the looming
> deadline, is logically backwards. The challenge, which we tried to address
> forcefully in 2012, is to rethink the RDS from the ground up. In my view,
> this is:
>
>
>
> o necessary
>
>
>
> o feasible
>
>
>
> o will lead to a much cleaner model
>
>
>
> o will make it relatively straightforward to satisfy the GDPR and all
> similar regulations around the world.
>
>
>
> There are also some issues such as the relationship of name server
> operators that also need to be addressed.
>
>
>
> There is obviously much more that needs to be said. I will contribute as
> much and as quickly as I can.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180214/6aca3fd7/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list