[ispcp] Fwd: Re: [council] Letter to GNSO Council from "thick" WHOIS Implementation Review Team (IRT)

[Wolf-Ulrich Knoben]

FYI

-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: 	Re: [council] Letter to GNSO Council from "thick" WHOIS 
Implementation Review Team (IRT)
Datum: 	Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:51:06 +0000
Von: 	Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
An: 	Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org>, GNSO Council List 
<council at gnso.icann.org>
Kopie (CC): 	Dennis Chang <dennis.chang at icann.org>



Dear all,

The letter to the GNSO Council from “thick” WHOIS Implementation Review 
Team has now been posted on the GNSO Website 
here:https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/drafts
And can be viewed directly here: 
https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gnso-appointments-procedure-15dec16-en.pdf

Kind regards

Nathalie

On 12/17/16, 4:13 PM, "owner-council at gnso.icann.org 
<mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Amr Elsadr" 
<owner-council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org> on 
behalf of aelsadr at egyptig.org <mailto:aelsadr at egyptig.org>> wrote:

    Hi,

    The “thick” WHOIS IRT has asked me to forward a letter (attached)
    sent on its behalf to the GNSO Council. If folks recall, the “thick”
    WHOIS Consensus Policy recommendations included this:

        "As part of the implementation process a legal review of law
        applicable to the transition of data from a thin to thick model
        that has not already been considered in the EWG memo is
        undertaken and due consideration is given to potential privacy
        issues that may arise from the discussions on the transition
        from thin to thick Whois, including, for example, guidance on
        how the long-standing contractual requirement that registrars
        give notice to, and obtain consent, from each registrant for
        uses of any personally identifiable data submitted by the
        registrant should apply to registrations involved in the
        transition. Should any privacy issues emerge from these
        transition discussions that were not anticipated by the WG and
        which would require additional policy consideration, the
        Implementation Review Team is expected to notify the GNSO
        Council of these so that appropriate action can be taken.”


    In June, 2015, ICANN’s Legal Dept. submitted a memo in follow up of
    the above recommendation, which can be found on this page:
    https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources_pages_thick-2Dwhois-2D2016-2D06-2D27-2Den&d=DgIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=E7JnHCK21L7fCyV2BvlvPAChI8mLV1q2HKsBWw0Mg24&s=eqwJY092JQX9BqW36nri__z-fkkujg94HmNvAfd47MU&e=
    .

    The IRT believes that the privacy/data protection law environment
    has changed since the production of the legal memo by ICANN Legal.
    Although the IRT has not reached any consensus on recommending
    further policy work as a result of its findings, there is agreement
    that the shifting privacy/data protection environment may complicate
    the transition from “thin” to “thick” WHOIS for some contracted
    parties. This letter is meant to brief the Council on the IRT’s work
    in that regard.

    Thanks.

    Amr


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ispcp/attachments/20161219/47ee7521/attachment.html>