[IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec 9 Analysis Review
Sarah Wyld
swyld at tucows.com
Fri Jul 5 13:36:20 UTC 2019
Thanks to the whole team for this useful discussion about Rec 9.
Dennis/Staff - can Rec 9 be on the agenda for our upcoming meeting,
please? At this time, the draft policy does not matche my understanding
of the intent of this recommendation, and I think we need to to discuss
as a team before we can effectively make edits in the google doc.
Thanks,
--
Sarah Wyld
Domains Product Team
Tucows
+1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392
On 6/24/2019 8:15 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> Thank YOU, Diane.
>
> Amr
>
> Sent from Mobile
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:24 PM, Plaut, Diane
> <Diane.Plaut at corsearch.com <mailto:Diane.Plaut at corsearch.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Amr-
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for this clarification. I understand and agree.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Diane Plaut*
>>
>> General Counsel and Privacy Officer
>>
>> cid:image001.png at 01D3CA70.18FC1D40
>>
>> Direct +1 646-899-2806
diane.plaut at corsearch.com
>> <mailto:diane.plaut at corsearch.com>
>>
>> 220 West 42^nd Street, 11^th Floor, New York, NY 10036, United
>> States
www.corsearch.com <http://www.corsearch.com/>
>>
>> Join Corsearch on Twitter <https://twitter.com/corsearch> Linkedin
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/2593860/> Trademarks + Brands
>> <http://trademarksandbrands.corsearch.com/>
>>
>> Customer Service/Platform Support: 1 800 SEARCH1™ (1 800 732
>> 7241)
Corsearch.USCustomerService at corsearch.com
>> <mailto:Corsearch.USCustomerService at corsearch.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Confidentiality Notice:* This email and its attachments (if any)
>> contain confidential information of the sender. The information is
>> intended only for the use by the direct addressees of the original
>> sender of this email. If you are not an intended recipient of the
>> original sender (or responsible for delivering the message to such
>> person), you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure,
>> copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance of the
>> contents of and attachments to this email is strictly prohibited. If
>> you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
>> sender at the address shown herein and permanently delete any copies
>> of this email (digital or paper) in your possession.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>
>> *Reply-To: *Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>
>> *Date: *Monday, June 24, 2019 at 6:33 AM
>> *To: *"Plaut, Diane" <Diane.Plaut at corsearch.com>
>> *Cc: *"mcanderson at verisign.com" <mcanderson at verisign.com>,
>> "irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org" <irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>
>> *Subject: *Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec 9 Analysis Review
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> To be clear, my understanding isn’t that changes to the contracts
>> between ICANN and ROs/Registrars are unnecessary for the purpose of
>> providing data for compliance purposes, or to satisfy the required
>> processing activities in Purpose 5. The latter are meant to comply
>> with relevant laws (at least the one we identified and worked on
>> during Phase 1). What I am supporting is that there is no need to
>> come up with Consensus Policy language for these changes to be made.
>>
>>
>>
>> The recommendation is for changes to be made to these agreements, if
>> needed, and as Marc pointed out, recommendation 9 also points out
>> that the scope of compliance requests is already adequately covered
>> in the existing contracts. So changes are surely necessary, but I
>> don’t believe the IRT can add any value at this point.
>>
>>
>>
>> Of course, if I have missed anything, would be happy to be corrected.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Amr
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 24, 2019, at 12:59 AM, Plaut, Diane
>> <Diane.Plaut at corsearch.com <mailto:Diane.Plaut at corsearch.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I think we need to further consider this because to say it is not
>> needed does not adequately address the changes to comply with
>> relevant laws. The recommendation has the purpose of addressing
>> prospective changes - can we be certain such changes will or are
>> not needed definitely at this time?
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>>
>>
>> Diane
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 23, 2019, at 4:04 AM, Amr Elsadr
>> <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja <mailto:aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Makes sense to me.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Amr
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 21, 2019, at 9:13 PM, Anderson, Marc via
>> IRT.RegDataPolicy <irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org
>> <mailto:irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Team,
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with Sarah on this. Recommendations #9 directs
>> ICANN, registries and registrars to look at “the
>> Contracts” (here referring to applicable Registry
>> Agreements and Registrar Accreditation Agreement) making
>> updates “if needed” to be in line with purpose 5
>> (contractual compliance).
>>
>>
>>
>> The recommendation notes that the contracts already
>> provide the appropriate scope for contractual compliance
>> requests and subsequent transfer. New consensus policy
>> language requiring Registry operators and registrars to
>> transfer data to ICANN is not needed, nor is that what is
>> called for by the recommendation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Marc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* IRT.RegDataPolicy
>> <irt.regdatapolicy-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:irt.regdatapolicy-bounces at icann.org>> *On Behalf
>> Of *Sarah Wyld
>> *Sent:* Friday, June 21, 2019 8:26 AM
>> *To:* irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org
>> <mailto:irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>
>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec 9
>> Analysis Review
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello Team,
>>
>> I have a question about the direction we're taking for
>> Rec 9, and want to bring it up with the team for
>> discussion. I am hoping we can go over it by email, as I
>> will not be able to join you in Marrakech.
>>
>> This draft policy section I think tries to encompass the
>> intent of the Recommendation, it talks about how ICANN
>> can require Rr/Ry to provide data, and our edits
>> yesterday focused on ensuring that applicable laws are
>> met, only relevant data is requested, etc.
>>
>> But the Rec itself starts with "The EPDP Team recommends
>> that *updates, if needed, are made to the contractual
>> requirements* concerning the registration data elements
>> for registries and registrars to transfer to ICANN Org
>> the domain name registration data that they process when
>> required/requested for purpose 5 (Contractual Compliance)."
>>
>> Does this mean that, instead of creating a new policy
>> section about it, we actually need to go back to
>> other *existing *ICANN contractual requirements and
>> modify those to have these limitations about applicable
>> laws, relevant data, etc.? It does not seem easily clear
>> to me, so hopefully better minds will have some ideas.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>>
>> Sarah Wyld
>>
>> Domains Product Team
>>
>> Tucows
>>
>> +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/20/2019 3:33 AM, Dennis Chang wrote:
>>
>> Dear IRT,
>>
>>
>>
>> The recommendations 9 is open for IRT review and
>> added to the IRT Task List as:
>>
>> 19
>>
>>
>>
>> _Review Recommendation 9 Analysis: Ry&Rr to ICANN org
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tEPl9E1Geq5Z_t1dPU2DcZVdnuycx1h6pmhFweKHaaA/edit>_
>>
>>
>>
>> 20190630
>>
>>
>>
>> The review document with the proposed policy language
>> has been added to the IRT Team Drive.
>>
>> The task assignment is linked to it for your future
>> reference.
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tEPl9E1Geq5Z_t1dPU2DcZVdnuycx1h6pmhFweKHaaA/edit
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for your continuing support.
>>
>>
>>
>> —
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Dennis S. Chang
>>
>> GDD Services & Engagement Program Director
>>
>> Telephone: +1 213 293 7889
>>
>> Skype: dennisSchang
>>
>> www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> IRT.RegDataPolicy mailing list
>>
>> IRT.RegDataPolicy at icann.org
>> <mailto:IRT.RegDataPolicy at icann.org>
>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/irt.regdatapolicy
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the
>> processing of your personal data for purposes of
>> subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the
>> ICANN Privacy Policy
>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the
>> website Terms of Service
>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit
>> the Mailman link above to change your membership
>> status or configuration, including unsubscribing,
>> setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery
>> altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IRT.RegDataPolicy mailing list
>> IRT.RegDataPolicy at icann.org <mailto:IRT.RegDataPolicy at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/irt.regdatapolicy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the
>> processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing
>> to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms
>> of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit
>> the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
>> delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a
>> vacation), and so on.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRT.RegDataPolicy mailing list
> IRT.RegDataPolicy at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/irt.regdatapolicy
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20190705/3f292994/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20190705/3f292994/signature.asc>
More information about the IRT.RegDataPolicy
mailing list