December 2019 - Gnso-epdp-team

CPH Response to Draft Initial Report
by Crossman, Matthew Dec. 4, 2019

Dec. 4, 2019

EPDP Team, Attached is the CPH response to the draft Initial Report. We look forward to discussing further on our call tomorrow. Best, Matt

6 6

Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Draft Initial Report
by James M. Bladel Dec. 4, 2019

Dec. 4, 2019

I’m not sure I understand the “conflict of interest” cited by Jennifer, below. Are you proposing that Registrars will refuse to disclose data solely on the basis of having a service agreement with the data subject? And how does disclosure terminate the customer relationship…I don’t recall our discussing this. While I can’t speak for the Registrars that Jennifer has worked with or for, I don’t believe most Registrars would suspend or terminate service based on a disclosure request. And while we seek to protect and secure our Registrant customers’ data, no Registrar I know would harbor an abusive or criminal actor for the sake of a $20 domain name. The primary interests in play are (1) the Registrar’s interests in avoiding fines by complying with data protection law, and (2) the Registrar’s interest in avoiding legal action by their Registrant customers (individually or as a class) for improper disclosure of their private data. J. ------------- James Bladel GoDaddy From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Jennifer Gore <Jennifer(a)winterfeldt.law> Date: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 15:57 To: "'Mueller, Milton L'" <milton(a)gatech.edu>, "King, Brian" <Brian.King(a)markmonitor.com>, "gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Draft Initial Report Notice: This email is from an external sender. Hello All, In my opinion, the Registrar is the worst party to be the decision maker of the data subject due to the blatant conflict of interest. The registrant will have already entered into a legal relationship with the registrar under the registrant (end user) agreement along with it being in the best interests of the registrar to not terminate the relationship with the registrant. Therefore, I hope Milton is not saying that he will hold up consensus even if the DPAs do support the isolation of centralized decision making within ICANN Org. Best regards, Jennifer ________________________________ <https://www.winterfeldt.law/>[cid:image001.png@01D5AA05.84376940]<https://www.winterfeldt.law/><https://www.winterfeldt.law/> Jennifer Gore Internet Governance Winterfeldt IP Group 1200 17<x-apple-data-detectors://12/1>th<x-apple-data-detectors://12/1> St NW<x-apple-data-detectors://12/1>, Ste 501<x-apple-data-detectors://12/1> Washington, DC 20036<x-apple-data-detectors://12/1> jennifer(a)winterfeldt.law<mailto:jennifer@winterfeldt.law> +1 202 340 9631 From: Gnso-epdp-team [mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mueller, Milton L Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 1:29 PM To: King, Brian <Brian.King(a)markmonitor.com>; gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Draft Initial Report From: King, Brian <Brian.King(a)markmonitor.com<mailto:Brian.King@markmonitor.com>> >Are you saying that even if the DPB writes to the Strawberries and says >“yes, it’s possible to isolate liability for decision-making centrally with >ICANN Org”, it would still be impossible for us to come to consensus on >the centralized decision-making model? (ignoring how (un)likely we think >that response is) Yes, indeed. That is what I am saying. This is one reason we are not so pleased with all this kerfuffle about the EDPB. You’re putting the cart before the horse. What matters is not whether it is legally _possible_ for ICANN to magically absorb the legal responsibility of the registrars for releasing the data of their customers; what matters is whether that is _desirable_ from a policy standpoint. Legal advice or “guidance” from the EDPB has no bearing on what is the right policy, it only clarifies whether one of the policy options is feasible. We want the disclosure decision to be made as close as possible to the party who is directly accountable to the registrant, the data subject, and that’s the registrar. We believe that the legitimate interests of data requestors are served by standardizing the process, and centralizing and facilitating requests, but centralizing disclosure is going to make it into an automated rubber stamp, as I suspect you have already figured out. Dr. Milton L Mueller School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology [IGP_logo_gold block_email sig]

2 1

CPH response to Authorization Provider Building Block
by Alan Woods Dec. 3, 2019

Dec. 3, 2019

Dear Team, Please find attached the joint comments of the CPH regarding the Authorization Provider Building Block. Warm regards, Alan [image: Donuts Inc.] <http://donuts.domains> Alan Woods Senior Compliance & Policy Manager, Donuts Inc. ------------------------------ Suite 301, Block D, Iveagh Court Harcourt Road Dublin 2, County Dublin Ireland <https://www.facebook.com/donutstlds> <https://twitter.com/DonutsInc> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/donuts-inc> Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may include privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Donuts Inc. . Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Thank you.

1 0

Proposed agenda: EPDP Meetings #32 and #33
by Caitlin Tubergen Dec. 3, 2019

Dec. 3, 2019

Dear EPDP Team: Please find below the proposed agendas for EPDP Meetings #32 and #33. As a reminder, please remember to review the draft Initial Report prior to Wednesday’s meeting. Please provide initial reactions to the Initial Report in advance of Wednesday’s call. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- EPDP Phase 2 - Meeting #32 & #33 Proposed Agenda Wednesday, 4 December 2019 at 14.00 UTC Thursday, 5 December 2019 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Confirmation of agenda (Chair) 3. Welcome and housekeeping issues (Chair) (5 minutes) a) Legal committee update b) Status of building blocks 4. Draft Initial Report (30 minutes) a) Overview of draft Initial Report and outstanding items b) Initial reactions from EPDP Team – readiness for publishing for public comment? c) Confirm next steps 5. Preliminary Rec #8 – Response Requirements (20 minutes) Note: Updates made to reflect last week’s discussion. Placeholder language added to reflect status of discussion. Remaining items to be reviewed (following e)). a) Review remaining items b) Feedback from EPDP Team c) Confirm next steps 6. Preliminary Rec #7 – Authorization Provider (30 minutes) Note: Language developed by small team a) Review draft Initial Report language b) Feedback from EPDP Team c) Confirm next steps 7. Preliminary Rec #11 – Terms of Use (20 minutes) Note: Staff has updated this preliminary rec with the aim to address the comments that were provided in the google doc. a) Review Initial Report language b) Feedback from EPDP Team c) Confirm next steps 8. Preliminary Rec #14 - Automation (20 minutes) Note: A number of suggested edits have been incorporated in the language included in the Initial Report but a second reading did not take place yet. a) Review draft Initial Report language b) Feedback from EPDP Team c) Confirm next steps 9. Preliminary Rec #3 – User Groups Note: Language reflects staff proposal circulated to the mailing list which received support from CPH and comments from BC & IPC. Review draft Initial Report language Feedback from EPDP Team Confirm next steps 10. Preliminary Rec #5 - Purposes Note: Language reflects staff proposal circulated to the mailing list which received support from CPH and alternative language suggestions from BC & IPC. Review draft Initial Report language Feedback from EPDP Team Confirm next steps 11. Preliminary Rec #9 – Acceptable Use Policy Note: a) Staff has added placeholder language to reflect that this is still an item under consideration, b) Language added following ICANN66 discussions to address requests relating to special category data. Review draft Initial Report language Feedback from EPDP Team Confirm next steps 12. Preliminary Rec #13 – Financial sustainability Note: Minor updates made as a result of previous discussions – EPDP Team agreed to park further review for now. Review draft Initial Report language Feedback from EPDP Team Confirm next steps 13. Preliminary Rec #16 – Audits Note: Orange highlighted text reflect sections where EPDP Team members have expressed concerns for further discussion. Review draft Initial Report language Feedback from EPDP Team Confirm next steps 14. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): a) Tuesday 10 December at 14.00 UTC b) Confirm action items c) Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

3 2

Draft Initial Report - Google Doc
by Caitlin Tubergen Dec. 3, 2019

Dec. 3, 2019

Dear EPDP Team, As requested, please find a link to a Google doc of the Initial Report: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1isn0eJsqw-g-qvqRbocM6849OWpFl0WG/edit We kindly request members to please input comments ONLY. Please refrain from suggesting edits to the text at this time. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin

1 0

**Reminder** Meeting Invitation / Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP-P2 call / Wednesday, 04 December 2019
by Julie Bisland Dec. 3, 2019

Dec. 3, 2019

As a result of various requests to facilitate observers to follow the EPDP Phase 2 deliberations in real time, audio cast will be made available for the EPDP plenary meetings. Staff will be monitoring audio cast attendance numbers so that the EPDP leadership can assess its usage. As a reminder, the zoom recording, mp3 recording, chat transcript and transcript of the EPDP plenary meetings will be publicly posted as soon as available on the EPDP wiki page and GNSO master calendar. Dear all, The next meeting of the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 is scheduled on Wednesday, 04 December 2019 at 14:00 UTC for 120 minutes. (calls will be scheduled for 120 minutes but aim to keep to 90 minutes) For other times: https://tinyurl.com/vzz8of4 [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_vzz8of4&d=…> Agenda Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/UYEzBw The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> Meeting Audio Cast (for observers) To join the event, click on the link: Listen in browser: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01 [stream.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01.m3u<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Kind Regards, Terri If needed, an option to join via telephone has been added for this meeting. **New join information - Conference Bridge: Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 and Toll 213 233 3193 Other telephone numbers found here: http://www.adigo.com/icann [adigo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.adigo.com_icann&d=D…> Enter passcode on telephone: 7349

1 0