[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Legal Inquiry to ICANN

[Ayden Férdeline]

I do not support this as a path forward.

We have seen repeatedly that the legal advice we have been issued has been ignored by those who are unhappy with the message contained within it.

And I disagree with the assertion that there is a "clear lack of consensus" on the question of the extraterritorial nature of the GDPR.

To continue dwelling on this question will ensure that we never make any progress as a working group.

— Ayden

-------- Original Message --------
On 15 February 2018 12:01 AM, Michael Palage <michael at palage.com> wrote:

> Chuck,
>
> As one of the original authors to the this extraterritorial thread, I welcome all the legal interpretation by both lawyers and non-lawyers in connection the scope to Article 3 of the GDPR. I  think it is fair to say there is a clear lack of consensus.  Therefore I would like to propose the following.  Allow the group to comprise a list of legal questions regarding this issue and forward it to ICANN.org and ask of them the following:
>
> - Provide the list of questions to Hamilton for a response
> - Have ICANN legal provide a response to these same questions
>
> The reason for Number 2 is that John Jeffrey made very clear in the last webinar that he does NOT agree with all of the Hamilton analysis.  I think us ICANN volunteers toiling away in the PDP coal mine are entitled/deserve an answer to these questions to allow us to move forward with more productive work It does the group no good for a bunch of well-intentioned individuals lacking the requisite legal training to debate these issues.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20180214/bbf38da6/attachment.html>