[WHOIS-WG] Article 29 Party To ICANN

Thu Sep 27 23:10:45 UTC 2012

On 27 Sep 2012, at 20:24, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>
 wrote:

> The Washington DC meeting which was referred to in the RAA Negotiation update

The RAA negotiations are between registrars and ICANN.

Since the bulk of the "asks" have come from LEA / GAC they have held a couple of meetings with the negotiating teams over the last few months

None of the meetings have been recorded etc., as far as I know

> which Carlton had pointed out to the At Large list:
> 
>  "six additional negotiating sessions, including two all-day in-person
> meetings held in Washington DC (one of which was attended by Governmental
> Advisory Committee members and representatives from the law enforcement
> representatives)
> 
> Also further to third question that I had asked, I was and remain curious as to how the scope of those discussions affect all four studies but of particular interest the Whois Proxy and Privacy Abuse Study; the Whois Proxy and Privacy Relay and Reveal Study and the Whois Registrant Identification Study?

they're not related - at least not directly

the RAA meetings have been focussed on the topics that were decided based on the working group on the subject - with the bulk of requests coming from LEA / GAC

> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:15 AM, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele at blacknight.ie> wrote:
> Which meeting are you referring to?
> 
> Mr. Michele Neylon
> Blacknight
> http://Blacknight.tel
> 
> Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity
> 
> On 27 Sep 2012, at 20:07, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Michele and Patrick and others,
>> 
>> This is precisely why I raised the questions that I did earlier which were:-
>> 
>> 	• Was the session recorded and are there transcripts or audiopods?
>> 	• Who represented the GNSO and CCNSO  into those meetings?
>> 	• Were the experts currently conducting the 4 Whois Studies present in the meeting and did the discussions affect the current scope of their current studies?
>> 	• Who from the OECD, EC was present in that meeting?
>> 	• Which Law Enforcement Representatives attended and did they include Revenue Authorities and which countries were they from?
>> 	• Who set the Agenda of the Discussions and was this available on the Wiki or ICANN website?
>> 	• What was the outcome of the discussions?
>> The rationale behind these questions are simply that there is a clear demarcation in the sand on the general European/OECD approach on law enforcement in this area and the US approach. This is clear from the European Directive. The ECJ has set precedent also on the matter where it has prioritised privacy, data protection over "alleged breach" of intellectual property etc contrary to the US's approach of championing IPRs first above the other rights. [References have been provided in past threads and regurgitated on the At Large list so won't repeat them]
>> 
>> This is why I was curious to see who the law enforcement represented? As all law enforcers simply enforce laws (based on philosophical approaches/policies) of their jurisdictions. 
>> 
>> I agree with Patrick, and would go further to say that the ICANN organising articles recognise that it is a steward. 
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu> wrote:
>> This is excellent. I am glad to see the Article 29 WP showing some teeth and remind ICANN there are laws out there and that it needs to comply.
>> 
>> Now, of course, if the WP could convince the EU and national  data regulation agencies  to actually enforce their laws, it would finally put an end to a 20 year old discussion.
>> 
>> Patrick
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> On 27/09/12 19:54, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" wrote:
>>> http://www.internetnews.me/2012/09/27/article-29-working-party-deem-raa-asks-in-violation-of-eu-law/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Mr Michele Neylon
>>> Blacknight Solutions
>>> Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> WHOIS-WG mailing list
>> WHOIS-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/whois-wg
>> 
>> WHOIS WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Whois+Policy
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>> P.O. Box 17862
>> Suva
>> Fiji
>> 
>> Twitter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> WHOIS-WG mailing list
>> WHOIS-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/whois-wg
>> 
>> WHOIS WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Whois+Policy
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> P.O. Box 17862
> Suva
> Fiji
> 
> Twitter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
> 
>  
> 
> 

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845