[IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec 9 Analysis Review

Mon Jun 24 10:33:09 UTC 2019

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> 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> 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> 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> On Behalf Of Sarah Wyld
>>> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 8:26 AM
>>> To: 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
>>>>
>>>> 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/20190624/ee25b44d/attachment.html>