-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Executive Director

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)

Phone: +216 98 330 114

+216 52 385 114

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Le 18 sept. 2018 à 16:34, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> a écrit :

Hello CW,

Am sorry I caused some confusion, it's been clarified that the draft
statement on this subject is currently not at it's voting stage so there
will indeed be revisions and I expect that your comments will be taken into
consideration.

Regards

Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018, 16:29 mail@christopherwilkinson.eu CW, <
mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:

Seun: What should I do now? Several support my comments. None support the
original text?

When is the next CPWG meeting?

C.

El 18 de septiembre de 2018 a las 15:38 Seun Ojedeji <
seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> escribió:

Hello Alan,

Wrong call, I think I may have mixed up the statements:
https://community.icann.org/x/CwA5BQ

Regards

Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018, 12:47 Seun Ojedeji, <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Alan,

Considering that some are having concern about the statement and since
ALAC members have voting rights to same, I will like to request that the
current vote on the statement be extended or put on hold in order to review
the statement accordingly.

Regards

Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018, 11:35 Marita Moll, <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:

I am supportive as well. Thanks for you remarks.

Marita

On 9/16/2018 10:51 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

+1
Excellent remarks
R

On 16.09.2018, at 22:13, mail@christopherwilkinson.eu CW <
mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:

Good evening:

Please find below and attached a few comments on the proposed draft ALAC
statement UAM and related matters.

Regards

Christopher Wilkinson

--------------------------

*ALAC Draft statement on GDPR and UAM.*

*Comments from Christopher Wilkinson*

*General*

The draft paper brings forward some interesting arguments and a useful
perspective on certain aspects of ICANN's provisional UAM position. It is
not clear how these aspects relate to the on-going work in the other
current ICANN fora, notably the EPDR.

Although this draft is rather long for the purpose that it serves, it
helps to relate the eventual ALAC position to the ICANN interim proposals.
Here it would be helpful for a start to show clearly that the different
fonts and colours that are used carry distinct meanings. Thus, it is only
the paragraphs that appear in *italics *that constitute the proposed ALAC
statement. Correct?

At several junctures in the draft, the text reads rather more like a
defense of the IPR interest in WHOIS as expounded by the IPC constituency
rather than a draft ALAC statement on behalf of the At Large community and
Internet users, world wide.
I do not share the implicit presumption that there is some sort of
co-incidence between trademark rights and consumer protection. Trademark
protection is primarily about maintaining prices for branded products.

Insofar as the IPC wishes to make the case for an open Whois, they are of
course free to do so, but I think that is not an appropriate line for ALAC
to take.

*Third party access*

Specifically, the draft refers several times to access to data by third
parties who would become 'accredited users'. Who are they going to be? How
shall they be defined, world-wide? Who will accredit them?

Thus, we have 'intellectual property lawyers' and 'accredited parties'
(p.2). Later, (p.3) we have 'a finite list of types of third parties …
[which] should not be exhaustive … and needs to be fairly limited'. Which
are suggested to be 'just examples'. There seems to be some internal
contradiction here.

From a global perspective there is arguably a serious problem of
definition and coherence among this terminology. Notably in the event of
'global access' (p.5); so that a Registrar in country A, would have to give
access to an 'accredited' third party from country B, that the Registrar
may not know and may not trust.

*Eligibility*

In an ideal world one might give credence to the ability of a multi
stakeholder process to deliver criteria for eligibility. However, the fact
is that the ICANN multi stakeholder community is still highly biassed
towards the interests of certain countries and certain stakeholders. Most
governments, world-wide, are quite unlikely to accept criteria and
identified Eligible User Groups as determined by the ICANN multi
stakeholder community as it is currently constituted. Particularly if the
process in question is designed to minimise the information and influence
of the governments concerned. Furthermore, ALAC should be careful what it
asks for; I would have serious doubts as to the capacity or interest of our
At Large Structures (ALS) to reliably identify such Eligible Users in all
their respective countries. It would of course be out of the question for
stakeholders in third countries to identify their preferred Eligible User
Groups in another jurisdiction.

The Framework's examples of Eligible User Groups is so broad as to amount
almost to 'everyone concerned'. The effect of such a wide scope would be to
dilute any possibility of effectively restricting access to personal data,
and to considerably aggravate the possibility of creating any such 'finite
list' of Eligible Users, as referred to above.

*Bulk Access*

It has been notorious for more than two decades that bulk access to Whois
by agents and third parties has been one of the more egregious breaches of
European data protection laws by ICANN.

Now it has got to stop.

Clearly, Whois data obtained legitimately must not be forwarded to
unauthorised third parties (p.7) nor agglomerated to create a shadow Whois.
However, these observations in the draft beg the question as to how much
Whois data has already been accessed in bulk, agglomerated and forwarded to
third parties? If so, has the data been deleted?

Furthermore, the very existence of this process in ICANN is probably
creating an existential incentive to get and keep as much Whois data as
possible before GDPR related restrictions are finally introduced by ICANN.
Registries and Registrars should be instructed to suspend all bulk access
forthwith, if they have not already done so.

* * * *

In conclusion and in short, the combination – in this draft – of broad and
vague authorisation, eligibility of third parties and bulk access, would
amount to re-creating the *status quo ante *by any other name. Which
would be interpreted elsewhere as a rejection of the requirements of GDPR.

------------------------------

CW/16.09.2018

El 12 de septiembre de 2018 a las 8:25 Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org>
escribió:

All,

At long last, I attach a draft of the ALAC Statement on ICANN's proposal
for the framework of a possible Unified Access Model.

Evin, can you please add this to the wiki?

I look forward to comments, questions and proposed changes to this draft.

Best regards,

Greg

--
Greg Shatan
greg@isoc-ny.org

"The Internet is for everyone"

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
GTLD-WG mailing list
GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

<COMMENTS ON DRAFT STATEMENT.pdf>
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
registration-issues-wg mailing list
registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing listCPWG@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
registration-issues-wg mailing list
registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
registration-issues-wg mailing list
registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
GTLD-WG mailing list
GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs