<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">So I looked at the details laid out by Goran. If you sat thru the EWG, it would, as Yogi Berra is reputed to have said; 'de ja vu all over again'. Because it parses - as did the EWG! - and reformats the very arguments used in deciding for 2-tiered access. Which seems now to be the ascendant model for a new RDDS, even as it recognizes a distributed data model with separate data controllers. What the EWG favoured for reporting is essentially, Goran's Model 2.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font size="4" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif">First of all it is just too rich for my blood for ICANN org to say "</font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">ICANN
Org acknowledges that it is either expressed or implied in all of ICANN Org’s
agreements that the contracted party must comply with all applicable laws" . </span><font size="4" color="#000000" style=""><font face="Calibri, sans-serif">If so, why the subterfuge of evasions, collusions and work-arounds inherent to the Procedures for Handling WHOIS Conflicts and the exemptions that must be applied for and granted? Maybe they will now accept my declarations pertaining; it is nothing more than make work for lawyers. </font></font></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">Secondly, I cannot see the rationale for different data retention period for the models. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">So now, the argumentative parts:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">It is clear that Model 3 would fix every data privacy/protection jurisdictional requirement; safe and easy to implement. No, it isn't just GDPR that has DP laws. There are others around the world inspired by GDPR and its reciprocity language for data transfer that this solution would neatly address. Unless of course the thinking is they don't count. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">It is easy to make the argument that the WHOIS dataset could be collected legally under colour of the GDPR calls 'legitimate interests' of the registrar and indeed be shared with ICANN. I don't so much see that as the major hurdle. The real hurdle to overcome is the declaration by WP29 that in context of the domain name transaction, a registrant cannot be said to have 'freely given' personal data for the transaction if, by not so giving, it means the domain is not acquired.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">My advice. Obfuscate and equivocate no further. We are yet to see a defined policy in one place. Here's an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone; provide guidance and say from the preponderance of facts and given due consideration, ICANN org is for Model 2. Bam. Policy and prose declared one shot in one place, the end.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">-Carlton</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;font-size:large">-Carlton </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><br>==============================<br><i><font face="comic sans ms, sans-serif">Carlton A Samuels</font></i><br><font face="comic sans ms, sans-serif"><i>Mobile: 876-818-1799<br><font color="#33CC00">Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround</font></i></font><br>=============================</div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 11:36 PM, Alan Greenberg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
In my mind, there is no question that we need to respond. <br><br>
The models are NOT what I was expecting, but that is not particularly
relevant at this point. ICANN's challenge is to attempt to saitisfy data
commissioners, who will not likely tell us ahead of time that they agree
with us or not, But to do that while to the extent prossible, maintaining
WHOIS so it can at least partially satisfy the ongoing important uses of
WHOIS, particularly with respect to fighting DNS abuse and malicious
activities. <br><br>
So for example, Model 3 certainly satisfies privacy concerns (although we
could endlessly debate whether the expiration date is private information
or not), but it shuts down virtually all other uses of WHOIS (including
trade mark protection and the UDRP) and I find including it as one of the
proposed models rather ludicrous. It is certainly easy to implement. And
cheap. <br><br>
Alan<div><div class="h5"><br><br>
At 14/01/2018 03:24 PM, Holly Raiche wrote:<br><br>
</div></div><blockquote type="cite" class="m_-3561984745614660365cite"><div><div class="h5">So you do support responding -
whatever it is called?<br><br>
Thanks<br><br>
Holly<br>
On 15 Jan 2018, at 7:15 am, Sebicann Bachollet
<<a href="mailto:sebicann@bachollet.fr" target="_blank">sebicann@bachollet.fr</a>>
wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="m_-3561984745614660365cite">Yes Holly<br>
It is exactly what I was pointing out.<br>
SeB<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="m_-3561984745614660365cite">Le 14 janv. 2018 à 20:35, Holly
Raiche
<<a href="mailto:h.raiche@internode.on.net" target="_blank">
h.raiche@internode.on.net</a>> a écrit :<br><br>
Hi Sebastian<br><br>
I did read the words. But seriously, he is asking for a response -
whatever it is called. And given the importance of the issue,
we should respond - whatever we call it.<br><br>
Holly<br>
On 15 Jan 2018, at 3:05 am, Sebicann Bachollet
<<a href="mailto:sebicann@bachollet.fr" target="_blank">sebicann@bachollet.fr</a>>
wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="m_-3561984745614660365cite">No comment but feedback ;)<br>
"To help inform this, please provide <b>your feedback by 29 January
2018</b>. Please send your feedback to
<a href="mailto:gdpr@icann.org" target="_blank">gdpr@icann.org</a>. »<br>
<a href="https://www.icann.org/news/blog/data-protection-and-privacy-update-seeking-community-feedback-on-proposed-compliance-models" target="_blank">
https://www.icann.org/news/<wbr>blog/data-protection-and-<wbr>privacy-update-seeking-<wbr>community-feedback-on-<wbr>proposed-compliance-models</a>
<br>
SeB<br><br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="m_-3561984745614660365cite">Le 14 janv. 2018 à 16:39, Glenn
McKnight
<<a href="mailto:mcknight.glenn@gmail.com" target="_blank">mcknight.glenn@gmail.com</a>
> a écrit :<br><br>
Hi Holly<br>
Interesting you mentioned this issue, two things to share with
you<br><br>
1. NCUC did a session at the IGF and curious if anyone followed
their tread. they had a good google doc on the issues<br>
2. NARALO is having monthly hot topics during the second half of our
monthly membership calls. I was thinking of this issue as a topic for
March since I have Cybersecurity as the February topic. I
will need someone to level set the issue. We had Net Neutrality for
January<br><br>
Glenn<br><br>
Glenn McKnight<br>
NARALO Secretariat<br>
<a href="mailto:mcknight.glenn@gmail.com" target="_blank">mcknight.glenn@gmail.com</a><br>
skype gmcknight<br>
twitter gmcknight<br>
<a href="tel:(289)%20830-6259" value="+12898306259" target="_blank">289-830 6259</a><br>
.<br><br>
On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 1:07 AM, Holly Raiche
<<a href="mailto:h.raiche@internode.on.net" target="_blank">
h.raiche@internode.on.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>Folks<br><br>
</dd><dd>Two days ago, Goran’s blog posted ICANN’s proposed there models for
addressing the issue of RDS information and the EU Data Protection
rules. According to the blog, 'community input' is being sought -
by the end of January.<br><br>
</dd><dd>Given the significance of this discussion on the information that
registries/registrars collect and display, I am assuming that ALAC will
be making comments? We should, at the least, have a page on the wiki for
comments???<br><br>
</dd><dd>Holly<br>
</dd><dd>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
</dd><dd>ALAC mailing list<br>
</dd><dd><a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
</dd><dd>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" target="_blank">
https://atlarge-lists.icann.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br><br>
</dd><dd>At-Large Online:
<a href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org/" target="_blank">http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a>
<br>
</dd><dd>ALAC Working Wiki:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)" target="_blank">
https://community.icann.org/<wbr>display/atlarge/At-Large+<wbr>Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</a>
<br><br>
</dd></dl><br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
ALAC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" target="_blank">
https://atlarge-lists.icann.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br><br>
At-Large Online:
<a href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org/" target="_blank">http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a>
<br>
ALAC Working Wiki:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)" target="_blank">
https://community.icann.org/<wbr>display/atlarge/At-Large+<wbr>Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</a>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br></div></div>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<br>
Content-Disposition: inline<br>
X-Microsoft-Exchange-<wbr>Diagnostics:<br>
<u></u> <u></u>
1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:<wbr>VKdvj5FaSMKqurXWxPSs+5KrD7bDD/<wbr>z8Moc1vJY/5HGcetDlA7ssVCV/<wbr>YElAUh7SGN24GFL4MjoTHmpx97pl9l<wbr>jfUuFYftyzmxdiPED3xH0Yuhq0n312<wbr>NRn8xUkI1sHN<br>
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-<wbr>Info:<br>
<u></u> <u></u>
jEucbbUatzmeUElwm8qHyl9PflMj0M<wbr>X5zDILXM3lJZqNG+<wbr>Qw6mRWfuvCa7BJkfZPBvWUFPdAfb+<wbr>KZZ6q9cvWmtDVfaoxUVOj39PuvHHus<wbr>gWHqVhxcOuKs+<wbr>OgEvaoDljUn0N5yfBbgrkmusOJV/<wbr>r0yA==<span class=""><br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
ALAC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" target="_blank">
https://atlarge-lists.icann.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br><br>
At-Large Online:
<a href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org/" target="_blank">
http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a><br>
ALAC Working Wiki:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC" target="_blank">
https://community.icann.org/<wbr>display/atlarge/At-Large+<wbr>Advisory+Committee+(ALAC</a>
)</span></blockquote></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
ALAC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org">ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://atlarge-lists.icann.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br>
<br>
At-Large Online: <a href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a><br>
ALAC Working Wiki: <a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/<wbr>display/atlarge/At-Large+<wbr>Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>