June 2017 - comments-whois-privacy-law-03may17@icann.org

[Comments-whois-privacy-law-03may17] Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) comments on Revised ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law: Process and Next Steps
by svg＠milathan.ltd June 30, 2017

June 30, 2017

Please find attached, in PDF format, the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) and Registrars Stakeholder Group (RrSG) comments on the Revised ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law: Process and Next Steps. In the interest of time, the RySG and the RrSG did not conduct a formal vote on these comments. They were circulated and debated on our mailing list, with no member expressing opposition to their submission. Please do not hesitate to contact me or any member of the RySG or RrSG Executive Committees should you have any questions. Best regards, Stéphane Van Gelder RySG Vice Chair (Policy)

1 0

[Comments-whois-privacy-law-03may17] Personally my opinion is
by Roses Havethorns June 18, 2017

June 18, 2017

If an illegal act or crime is being committed and the criminal and assistors are complaining or involving legal official in the matter only to cover their tracks or evade prosecution. Stating false accusations to officials while they have committed a felony act. Should be considered illegal for the fact of manipulating the system and laws in place. My daughter has been kidnapped once more and I have tried to contact them to reach my child. They in their defense have demised a plan to block all their information and stated lies so they can refuse a court orders agreement contract for custody,kidnapping my daughter and then complaining about harrassment. They found a loop hole in the system and are now out to blame and or attempt to demand privacy policies to change so they can illegally commit federal offenses. Not good.

1 0

[Comments-whois-privacy-law-03may17] Update - Review of ICANN’s Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
by KIMPIAN Peter June 14, 2017

June 14, 2017

Dear Madam, Sir, Please find attached the comments on behalf of the Data Protection Unit of the Council of Europe to the revised Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. Best regards, Peter Kimpian Data Protection Unit Human Rights and Rule of Law CONSEIL DE L'EUROPE - COUNCIL OF EUROPE tel : + 33(0) 3 90 21 58 51 www.coe.int/dataprotection<http://www.coe.int/dataprotection> [cid:image003.png@01D27D7A.9C76A8F0] From: gac-bounces(a)gac.icann.org<mailto:gac-bounces@gac.icann.org> [mailto:gac-bounces@gac.icann.org] On Behalf Of Fabien Betremieux Sent: mercredi 14 juin 2017 13:06 To: gac(a)icann.org<mailto:gac@icann.org>; gac-pswg(a)icann.org<mailto:gac-pswg@icann.org> Subject: [GAC] Update - Review of ICANN’s Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law Dear GAC and PSWG Members, Please note that the Public Comment period below was extended to 7 July 2017. Best Regards Fabien From: Fabien Betremieux <fabien.betremieux(a)icann.org<mailto:fabien.betremieux@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2017 at 02:11 To: "gac(a)icann.org<mailto:gac@icann.org>" <gac(a)icann.org<mailto:gac@icann.org>> Subject: Review of ICANN’s Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law Dear GAC Members, On 3 May, a public comment period<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en> was opened in connection with a GNSO Council resolution<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20170216-1> which called for ICANN to review the effectiveness of the recently revised Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/whois-privacy-conflicts-procedure-200…>. As you may be aware, this is happening in the context of the changing landscape in Data Protection Law around the world, in particular with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).<http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/reform/index_en.htm> On 15 May, a letter from the ICANN GDD President to the GAC Chair<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/atallah-to-schneider-1…> was released on ICANN’s Correspondence page<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence>. In this letter, considering the GAC’s stated interest in these matters (most recently in the Copenhagen Communiqué<https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee>), ICANN is inviting GAC comments on its staff paper<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/whois-privacy-conflicts-procedu…>, including through participation of National Data Protection Agencies (DPA). The deadline for Public Comments is set to 12 June 2017. Additional Information: The Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/whois-privacy-conflicts-procedure-200…> is designed for contracted parties to request exemptions from their contracts with ICANN in case there is a conflict between their obligations and Privacy Laws. While it is in place since 2016, it has never been used because it original trigger has been considered unrealistic: an entity would have to be under a judicial or administrative proceeding to benefit from it. Recognizing this, a first revision process was undertaken in 2015 and led to the addition of a new trigger. However, some contracted parties did not think this would be any more practical. In fact, as indicated during the recent ICANN GDD Summit<https://www.icann.org/gddsummit>, Dutch new gTLD Registries (.AMSTERDAM, .FRL) reportedly had to breach their contract obligations to comply with Dutch Privacy Law for lack of meeting any of the triggers of this procedure. ICANN is now asking for GAC and DPAs input on 4 questions included in the staff paper (among others): 1. How feasible is it for data protection agencies to provide a party with a written statement indicating that a WHOIS obligation in an ICANN contract conflicts with national law? 2. What type of evidence or documentation should a requesting party provide to the data protection agencies? 3. What challenges, if any, will data protection agencies face in terms of providing a party with a written statement indicating that a WHOIS obligation in an ICANN contract conflicts with national law? 4. What improvements or changes could be made to better engage data protection agencies in this process, i.e., Would direct contact with ICANN make the process more efficient? Thank you for your attention Best Regards -- Fabien Betremieux GAC Relations Advisor Policy Development Support | ICANN FR: +33 7 60 09 09 40 | US: +1 310 463 5334 | Skype: fabien.betremieux

1 0

[Comments-whois-privacy-law-03may17] Response from RF
by Еланская Юлия Шавкатовна June 12, 2017

June 12, 2017

Dear colleagues, Please consider the response of the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation to the discussion of procedure for handling WHOIS conflicts with national privacy law. Best regards, Yulia Elanskaya Deputy Director of International Cooperation Department Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation

1 0

[Comments-whois-privacy-law-03may17] New Zealand submission on Revised ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law [UNCLASSIFIED]
by Harry Chapman June 11, 2017

June 11, 2017

Hello, Attached is the New Zealand Government comment on the Revised ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en) Kind regards, Harry Harry Chapman ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee Representative for New Zealand Communications Policy | Building, Resource, and Markets Group Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment | NEW ZEALAND www.govt.nz <http://www.govt.nz/> - your guide to finding and using New Zealand government services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivery to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error and that any use is strictly prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your computer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0