Dear Jamie Hedlund:
I have read your draft report.
I regret that i have to dissociate myself from the implication therein that this is a fair and transparent account of the work of the IAG, nor that it is a reasonable representation of the present and future situation of Whois Conflicts with Privacy Laws. I would be grateful if my dissent be clearly indicated in the Header of any eventual final document based on this draft.
1. I have placed at the disposal of the IAG and the staff the consequences of this policy in the EU, insofar as I am able as a private individual. My contribution in this respect has been systematically ignored by the staff. I question your competences to do so. In particular, even under the proposed Alternative Trigger, each Registry and each Registrar would still have to make separate individual applications for a waiver through each of their national authorities. I have explained to the IAG several times, why that is unnecessarily onerous, notably in view of the harmonisation of EU law in this area. I have requested a block exemption per jurisdiction. e.g. for the EU as a whole.
2. Regarding 'Annex 4': as I have said before, I do not accept that these are 'Minority' statements. I consider that they reflect the opinion of a large number of entities and organisations, including those with formal responsibilities in the field. ICANN staff are not empowered to dismiss such as a 'minority'.
Specifically, I request that the reference to these statements in the text be associated with a direct active Link to all the texts in Appendix 4.
3. More generally, if I understand the gist of the Transition, ICANN's Board and staff would become much more closely scrutinised by the global community.
Thus, I regret to have to remind you that in that context, should the staff continue to ride roughshod over consistent and informed advice from members of the community, the prospects for a stable outcome post-Transition could indeed be prejudiced.
Without apology for brevity, I have already spent enough time trying to help you to get this right, apparently without success. As an active participant in CCT-IAG, CWG, CCWG and At Large, I feel that ICANN is asking too much if the time devoted to supporting your procedures is simply acknowledged by the staff in a fin de non reçevoir. Please record my dissent.
CW