[IRT.RegDataPolicy] IRT Liaison report on Rec7 during the 20Aug2020 GNSO Council Meeting

[Rubens Kuhl]

> On 9 Sep 2020, at 15:10, Sarah Wyld <swyld at tucows.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello team,
> 
> I'd like us to return to Roger's initial email, which I think had some very valuable points in it that have been a bit passed over. I've attached it here for reference (hope it comes through).
> 
> Recommendation #7 says the data "must be transferred from registrar to registry provided an appropriate legal basis exists and data processing agreement is in place."
> 
> Whether the Thick Whois Transition Policy is itself the grounds for a legitimate interest in the data or not is beside the point; our duty in this IRT is to implement the recommendations, and omitting that language from the final Policy would mean we lose requirements which the Phase 1 EPDP team found important enough to specifically include in the recommendation.
> 
> If a Registry's implementation of the Thick Whois Transition Policy is such that all the data elements listed in Rec 7 are required, then that's fine as long as the registry provides an appropriate data processing agreement to the registrar. But it's not appropriate for us as the IRT to modify the Policy by removing this requirement.
> 

And if the IPT tries removing that language without an IRT consensus, this would be fast grounds to an RfR or to an IRP.

If the legal basis exists, there is no problem in keeping the exact recommendation language since it always be true, right ?


Rubens


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20200909/5b647f35/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 529 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20200909/5b647f35/signature.asc>