Hi, Amy. 

Thanks for the quick turnaround on this draft. 

Just to clarify – we didn’t discuss that all uses of “should” would be changed to “shall” in a blanket fashion.  Just the paragraphs we discussed/voted on.  Were additional changes made that we didn’t discuss?

As we discussed today regarding II(C), in order to avoid duplication of messaging to registrants, this paragraph should also include an exception, similar in nature to II(D)(ii), that a P/P services does not have to send this if the registrar it is affiliated with has also done this.

I know we plan to come back to Section E (Privacy and Proxy Terms of Service) later on, but I wanted to point out something about the II(E)(vii) – per the footnote, the PDP did not indicate that the terms of service had to include pricing, but that the pricing had to be displayed to customers.  This is also similar to Consensus Policies registrars must follow.  I don’t believe the intent was for the pricing to be a part of the terms of service.

We didn’t discuss AB25 today regarding II(I) but I wanted to add a comment for discussion.  Based on the footnote and my memory, I don’t think this is for reports of all abuse “involving Registered Names that are registered through the Privacy and/or Proxy provider.”  Domains are registered with the registrar or registrar’s reseller and the registrar is responsible for investigating abuse.  I think the PDP’s intent was for P/P providers to maintain a contact for abuse relating to the P/P services only.  

Thanks,

Darcy

From: <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Amy Bivins <amy.bivins@icann.org>
Reply-To: <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 9:45 AM
To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org>
Subject: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Updated draft PP Policy Section 2, updates from today's Privacy/Proxy IRT call

Hello, All,

Thanks so much for your active participation on the Privacy/Proxy IRT call today—we had a very productive meeting. I’m attaching an updated version of Section 2 of the draft Policy document, which reflects our discussion on the call today.

To summarize, instances of “SHOULD” in the document have been changed to “SHALL” pursuant to discussion on the call about what the PDP WG intended—that these would be requirements, not best practices. Nearly everyone who participated in the “green check/red x” ask seemed to agree with this, with the exception of Volker.

Volker, if you would like to share any additional thoughts or reasoning surrounding the WG’s intent here and if anyone else feels strongly about this, please comment on the list. We want a full record and to ensure that we have interpreted the WG’s intent accurately, so we encourage everyone to please speak up (on this and always!).

I’ve also made some updates to the “data reminders” and “terms of service” section. And we will pick up on the ToS section next week.

Materials from the call will be posted on the wiki shortly. If anyone has questions or comments in the interim please reply to the list, and I will share any new materials with you as they are available.

Best,

Amy

Amy E. Bivins

Registrar Policy Services Manager

Registrar Services and Industry Relations

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551

Fax:  +1 (202) 789-0104

Email: amy.bivins@icann.org

www.icann.org

_______________________________________________ Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl mailing list Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl