[At-Large] G7 GAC and WHOIS - protecting end users
bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net
Wed Jul 3 14:59:02 UTC 2019
Thanks. I agree with Matthias.
I had not heard of this G7 group before, I assume its a law enforcement cooperation body? If so, then the letter is not just a non-substantive lobbying effort, but an IMO quite harmful statement as it says:
'In view of the importance of ensuring access to Whois data for law enforcement authorities, the G7 members call on ICANN to quickly implement a unified access solution that would make non-public Whois data accessible to third parties with legitimate purposes’.
Article 6. 1 GDPR states a.o.:
'Processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies:
(f.) processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child.'
And the there is the note:
'Point (f) of the first subparagraph shall not apply to processing carried out by public authorities in the performance of their tasks.'
That means the G7 group cannot base their, and other law enforcement agencies’, interest to acces non-public WHOIS data on article 6.1 (f). The legislator is to provide by law for the legal basis for public authorities to process personal data.
*** Please note that this communication is confidential, legally privileged, and subject to a disclaimer: https://www.ams-ix.net/ams/email-disclaimer ***
> On 3 Jul 2019, at 16:30, Matthias M. Hudobnik <matthias at hudobnik.at> wrote:
> Signed PGP part
> Dear Joanna,
> Thank you for sharing this with us ;-). This seems like a very general letter with no real substantive content just repeating what the GAC (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/ismail-to-chalaby-24apr19-en.pdf)and NTIA (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/redl-to-chalaby-04apr19-en.pdf) already said. I even enjoyed the statement from the EC (https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-epdp-recs-04mar19/attachments/20190417/6f0a65b2/CommentsontheTemporarySpecificationforgTLDRegistrationDataPolicyRecommendations-0001.pdf) more because the content of it was in a much more substantive manner.
> By the way - if anybody is interested, I wrote my entire diploma thesis about this topic (The Future of WHOIS - An analysis of the Policy Development Process under the GDPR with a focus on the litigation ICANN v. EPAG): https://unipub.uni-graz.at/download/pdf/3703735
> Have a nice day!
> Ing. Mag. Matthias M. Hudobnik
> matthias at hudobnik.at
> Von: At-Large [mailto:at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Joanna Kulesza
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 03. Juli 2019 13:19
> An: at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Betreff: [At-Large] G7 GAC and WHOIS - protecting end users
> Dear all,
> thought this might be of interest to better understand and substantiate user interests in the WHOIS/GDPR/UAM debate:
> Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
> Kind regards,
> Joanna Kulesza
> Joanna Kulesza, PhD
> University of Lodz, Poland
> ALAC / EURALO / Capacity Building Working Group Co-Chair
> SOI: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Joanna+Kulesza+SOI
> TT: @KuleszaJ
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
More information about the At-Large