I agree with Jonathan. For my own clarification, with EU citizens working and living all over the world for various reasons and varying lengths of time, what is the actual definition for "resident of the EU", Although I am a NZ citizen and live part-time in NZ, I am not considered resident there because I don't pay tax in NZ. I work and pay tax in the Cook Islands and am considered (by NZ) to be a Cook Island resident. M On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 4:12 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote:
I'm inclined to say restricted if for no other reason than we'll eventually have a bunch of GDPRs that are slightly different.
On 10/29/18, 9:36 PM, "GTLD-WG on behalf of Alan Greenberg" < gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
GDPR is applicable to residents of the EU by companies resident there and worldwide.
One of the issues is whether contracted parties should be allowed or required to distinguish between those who are resident there and elsewhere.
There is agreement that such distinction should be allowed, but EPDP is divided on whether it should be required. The GAC/BC/IPC want to see the distinction made, and at least one very large contracted party does already make the distinction. Other contracted parties are pushing back VERY strongly saying that there is virtually no way that the can or are willing to make the distinction.
The current (confusing) state of the working document is attached.
Which side should ALAC come down on?
- Restrict application to those to whom GDPR applies? - Apply universally ignoring residence?
As usual, quick replies requested.
Alan
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg