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

[Dotzero]

To simply assert that the extraterritorial nature of GDPR is the end all
and be all falls into the realm of the absurd. If another jurisdiction
passes legislation mandating publication of identifying (personal)
information in whois, what then? What happens if you are "Trumped" by U.S.
legislation? Do you really want to see a trade war or worse? We are dealing
with a complex and difficult situation that is the equivalent of wrestling
a jello snake in a vat of oil. We are best served by seeking outcomes that
accommodate GDPR as best as possible and recognize that other jurisdictions
do not necessarily follow the same principles as GDPR. I say this even
though I agree with many of the principles embodied in GDPR.

Michael Hammer


On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 6:07 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
wrote:

> 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:
>
>
>
>    1. Provide the list of questions to Hamilton for a response
>    2. 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180215/1a6010b5/attachment.html>