August 2019 - Gnso-epdp-team

Notes and action items - EPDP Phase 2 Meeting #14 - 15 August 2019
by Caitlin Tubergen Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 2019

Dear EPDP Team, Please find the notes and action items from today’s Phase 2 EPDP Team meeting below. As a reminder, the Phase 2 Legal Committee will meet on Tuesday, 20 August at 14:00 UTC, and the Phase 2 EPDP Team will meet on Thursday, 22 August at 14:00 UTC. Thank you. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- EPDP Phase 2 - Meeting #14Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14.00 UTCAction Items Groups are welcome to provide additional comments in response to early input in the Early Input Google Doc over the next two weeks (by 29 August). Support Staff will consider input received when compiling the Zero Draft document. EPDP Team members to provide feedback on the IP-5 use case via the IP-5 Use Case Google doc by Friday, 16 August. IPC EPDP Team members to review comments and distribute updated use case by Tuesday 20 August in preparation for a final reading on Thursday, 22 August. SSAC EPDP Team members to review comments received for SSAC 3 (Investigation of criminal activity where domain names are used. Typical specific example: PHISHING ATTACK) and distribute updated version of use case to EPDP Team by Tuesday 20 August in preparation for a final reading on Thursday, 22 August. SSAC EPDP Team members to distribute use case for SSAC 1 (When a network is undergoing an attack involving a domain name, and the operator(s) of that network need to contact the domain owner to remediate the security issue (DDOS, Botnet, etc.)) by Tuesday 20 August in preparation for a final reading on Thursday, 22 August. ALAC EPDP Team members to review comments received on ALAC 1 (Online buyers identifying and validating the source of goods or services/ Internet users validating the legitimacy of an email or a website to protect themselves) and distribute updated version of the use case by Tuesday, 27 August in preparation for final reading on Thursday, 29 August. Notes These high-level notes are designed to help the EPDP Team navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/ZwPVBQ.EPDP Phase 2 - Meeting #14Proposed AgendaThursday, 15 August 2019 at 14.00 UTC1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) Attendance will be taken from Zoom Remember to mute your microphones upon entry to Zoom. Please state your name before speaking for transcription purposes. Please remember to review your SOIs on a regular basis and update as needed. Updates are required to be shared with the EPDP Team. 2. Confirmation of agenda (Chair)3. Welcome and housekeeping issues (Chair) (5 minutes)a. Travel support for ICANN66 – update on applications received Please refer to this link to view the EPDP Members who have applied for travel support: https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/EPDP+Travel+Support+-+Phase+2 b. Reminder to book travel for September F2F in Los Angeles 4. Review of SO/AC/SG/C Early Input (45 minutes)a. Issues / clarifying questions identified (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/13ynT-XM5CDDyTDW0rsZdpt91ym7QrjUD/edib. Consider how to factor early input into drafting of Initial Report The Google Doc link shows all early input received. The input is organized by the category/charter question. Rather than go comment by comment, the groups were invited to review the input and provide clarifying questions. Input was provided by the BC and the RrSG. How would the group like to review this input? Support Staff has factored in this input in preparing the Zero Draft Possible path forward: opposition comments can be responded to in writing Those groups who provided initial input and whose initial input has been contested or objected to in the Google Doc, can respond in the Google doc Once substantive issues are discussed, the early inputs will be pulled and see where there is agreement and disagreement The Zero Draft will contain all substantive issues Skepticism on this approach - reviewing this on Google docs would require off-line discussions on every topic online Only groups directly participating in the EPDP provided comments. The Team has little time to get its work done, so as an alternative, proposal to do nothing with it. It provides good reference to everyone to explore each other’s viewpoints. However, since all early input submitters are represented on the Team, these views can be represented in the substantive calls themselves. There may be some items that do not correspond to Charter questions and the assumption was that the Team will review the items that do not correspond to the Charter questions. The Charter question feedback would discussed during the substantive discussion. Recommend getting clarity on the legal questions so that the Team has more clarity when reviewing the Zero draft. Bird & Bird is not planning to attend the F2F in Los Angeles. Nothing in the Zero Draft is carved in stone; it is easier to start working on something already written rather than drafting by committee c. Confirm next steps, if any Encourage those who would like to engage in online comments about early input to continue editing the Google Doc. All feedback will be taken into account in the writing of the Zero draft. 5. Use case – first reading: Providers requesting access required to facilitate due process in the UDRP and URS (IP 5) (45 minutesa. Introduction to use case (IPC) This use case is for participants in the UDRP/URS process Data is needed to know against whom the UDRP will be filed - whether multiple domain names can be included in a single complaint Data is also used to see if the alleged infringer acted in bad faith Based on who the registrant is, the issue may be resolved without filing a UDRP Lawful basis of entity disclosing the data - mostly 6(1)(b) and 6(1)(c) If the UDRP decision is appealed in court and data needs to be provided based on a subpoena, data may be processed in this context. Accreditation could be useful in some cases, e.g., WIPO, NAF, but the Team needs to think about what benefit that would provide b. Feedback from EPDP Team Safeguards are where the policy comes from - what are the steps the Team needs to go through to test this use case. What does the CP do to actually process this use case Important to note that the UDRP was designed in a way that does not take data protection into account at all - not everything in the UDRP’s existing procedures would be considered compliant with data protection law The UDRP was not drafted with GDPR in mind, but the core of the UDRP - proving that an entity has rights in a name and one entity who, in bad faith, registered a name it had no rights in. It may be helpful to have a legal look at required notices sent to a registrant when it registers a name and whether that is sufficient The RrSG will provide more comprehensive comments following this call. A URS and UDRP can be submitted without knowing who the respondent is. Perhaps disclosure could be to the UDRP Provider, and not the Complainant. Also, the Complainant can contact the Respondent, using the required contactability mechanisms. Trademark owners are being asked to prove a registrant has no rights and acted in bad faith - this is very difficult to do if you do not know who the registrant is Regarding specificity, instead of giving blanket criticism, it would be helpful to give an example of a safeguard you would propose adding. Issues with contractual basis as a lawful basis - this does not entail the contact b/w the registrant and the disclosing party. The relevant contractual relationship is b/w the data subject and the recipient of the data - as this does not exist in this use case, it may not be applicable here. If the recipient of the data decides not to file a UDRP/URS, is that a violation? The 6(1)(b) is vis-a-vis the data subject and not the entity who processes the data. This use case is in the context of a UDRP or URS that has been filed, not a “we might file”. Please refer to the Bird & Bird memo from Phase 1 regarding lawful basis. It is not acceptable to receive data after a UDRP has been filed. This Team is not here to test whether this is a valid use case - this is raw material to feed into the policy recommendations. This debate boils down to the question of legal basis. This use case is based on the legitimate interest of a third party - it is 6(1)(f). There shouldn’t be an artificial incentive to file UDRP cases. It is legitimate to request disclosure, to get the disclosure and then decide not to file a UDRP case - there should be no penalty for not filing. For third parties, it is a 6(1)(f). Disagree that this is a 6(1)(f) - believe this is a 6(1)(b) The Alan W. document describes how 6(1)(f) works - this is valuable if Team members do not have an understanding of 6(1)(f). In this particular use case, safeguards may be different if this is a 6(1)(b). How can every possible life situation be reflected in a policy? Is it possible to draw more general conclusions? Following the policy, a lot of work will have to be done on best practices, but this may not be part of the policy. c. Confirm next steps Brian to send updated use case to the Team following this call Staff to put updated version in Google Docs Team to provide input on updated version by tomorrow, Friday, 16 August Brian and IPC colleagues to distribute updated use case, factoring in comments received by Tuesday, 20 August 6. Any other business (5 minutes) Zero draft will be used as a tool for discussion in LA F2F, and will contain both draft policy principles and building blocks gleaned from EPDP Team’s discussions to date to assist Team in arriving at policy recommendations Next week, goal to try to close SSAC case, IP case Initial reading of SSAC 1 (When a network is undergoing an attack involving a domain name, and the operator(s) of that network need to contact the domain owner to remediate the security issue (DDOS, Botnet, etc.)) will be next Thursday, 22 August ALAC case will be discussed the following week (Thursday, August 29) 7. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): Thursday 22 August 2019 at 14.00 UTC (5 minutes) Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 | Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 held on Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/n6ajBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members and alternates can join the call, observers can join via audio cast, listen to the recordings and read the transcript afterwards. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/IYEpBQ>. Thank you. With kind regards, Andrea

1 0

Meeting Invitation: Observers GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2 call | Thursday, 22 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 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 Thursday, 22 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC for 120 minutes. (calls will be scheduled for 120 minutes but aim to keep to 90 minutes) 07:00 PDT, 10:00 EDT, 16:00 Paris CEST, 19:00 Karachi PKT, 23:00 Tokyo JST, (Friday) 00:00 Melbourne AEST For other times: https://tinyurl.com/y6h37wuq Agenda Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/oqajBg 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/stream02 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream02.m3u <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> If needed, an option to join via telephone has been added for this meeting. Passcode: EPDP Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL RIO DE JANEIRO: 55-21-40421490 0800-7610651 BRAZIL SAO PAULO: 55-11-3958-0779 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CROATIA 080-08-06-309 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 36-1-700-8856 06-800-12755 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 ITALY ROME: 39-06-8751-6018 800-986-383 ITALY TORINO: 39-011-510-0118 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7878-2631 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-6868-2631 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 8002-9246 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO GUADALAJARA (JAL): 52-33-3208-7310 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MEXICO CITY: 52-55-5062-9110 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MONTERREY: 52-81-2482-0610 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 1800-111-42453 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 ROMANIA 40-31-630-01-79 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 0800-002066 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 TURKEY 00-800-151-0516 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 8000-35702370 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 VIETNAM 120-11751 Thank you. Kind Regards, Andrea

1 0

Updated UDRP/URS Use Case
by King, Brian Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 2019

Hi Team, Here it is. Brian J. King Director of Internet Policy and Industry Affairs T +1 443 761 3726 markmonitor.com<http://www.markmonitor.com> MarkMonitor Protecting companies and consumers in a digital world

1 0

**Call on in 5 minutes** Meeting Invitation: Observers GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2 call / Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 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 Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC for 120 minutes. (calls will be scheduled for 120 minutes but aim to keep to 90 minutes) 07:00 PDT, 10:00 EDT, 16:00 Paris CEST, 19:00 Karachi PKT, 23:00 Tokyo JST, (Friday) 00:00 Melbourne AEST For other times: https://tinyurl.com/yy9zq8vs [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_yy9zq8vs&d…> Agenda Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/n6ajBg 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/stream02 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream02.m3u <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> If needed, an option to join via telephone has been added for this meeting. Passcode: EPDP Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL RIO DE JANEIRO: 55-21-40421490 0800-7610651 BRAZIL SAO PAULO: 55-11-3958-0779 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CROATIA 080-08-06-309 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 36-1-700-8856 06-800-12755 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 ITALY ROME: 39-06-8751-6018 800-986-383 ITALY TORINO: 39-011-510-0118 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7878-2631 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-6868-2631 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 8002-9246 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO GUADALAJARA (JAL): 52-33-3208-7310 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MEXICO CITY: 52-55-5062-9110 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MONTERREY: 52-81-2482-0610 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 1800-111-42453 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 ROMANIA 40-31-630-01-79 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 0800-002066 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 TURKEY 00-800-151-0516 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 8000-35702370 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 VIETNAM 120-11751 Thank you. Kind Regards, Terri

1 0

A note from the CPH reps
by Matt Serlin Aug. 14, 2019

Aug. 14, 2019

Please note the below is being sent on behalf of the CPH (RrSG and RySG) reps…thank you. With less than four weeks until our face-to-face meeting, the CPH is increasingly concerned with the lack of meaningful progress towards a first draft of policy recommendations. We attribute this lack of movement in part to the shortcomings of our approach to evaluating use cases. In our view, the success of this exercise depends on EPDP team members producing focused and specific use cases that, when viewed together, illustrate procedural commonalities and insights necessary to inform our recommendations. Instead, the use cases and our discussions so far are so broad or generalized that it is no longer clear how our review will ultimately lead to policy recommendation or actionable outcomes. Without an immediate correction to refocus our efforts, we are concerned about the EPDP team’s ability to meet deadlines and ultimately succeed in delivering a timely Initial Report for Phase II. The CPH proposes the following reasonable steps to help improve the utility of the use cases and the efficiency of our deliberations: * ● Use cases must be more specific, detailed, and focused on procedure in order to help us make observations and reach agreement. Use cases should be illustrative of a discrete set of procedural, legal, and policy considerations, rather than focused on validating a broad range of outcomes. * ● Our approach should not only consider use cases where access/disclosure is appropriate, but also examine circumstances where access/disclosure would not be granted. Our analysis of use cases is not intended to make value judgments about “deserving” users or interests. Our policy must focus on what is compliant, not what is merely desired. * ● We must prioritize and document agreement as we proceed through each use case. The Next Gen RDS implemented a “tentative agreements” document maintained by ICANN Staff to capture a list of non-binding, informal agreements that the group built upon as deliberations progressed. The document served as a transparent reference for all parties to help avoid re-litigating issues. This approach would also help solve a significant pain point from Phase I where the CPH found it difficult to track the source of agreements that ended up in the draft recommendations. We recommend adopting the same procedure. The CPH remains committed to the success of the EPDP and offers these suggestions in the spirit of achieving our shared goal of timely completion of a Final Report for Phase II.

2 1

**Reminder** Meeting Invitation: Observers GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2 call / Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 14, 2019

Aug. 14, 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 Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC for 120 minutes. (calls will be scheduled for 120 minutes but aim to keep to 90 minutes) 07:00 PDT, 10:00 EDT, 16:00 Paris CEST, 19:00 Karachi PKT, 23:00 Tokyo JST, (Friday) 00:00 Melbourne AEST For other times: https://tinyurl.com/yy9zq8vs [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_yy9zq8vs&d…> Agenda Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/n6ajBg 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/stream02 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream02.m3u <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> If needed, an option to join via telephone has been added for this meeting. Passcode: EPDP Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL RIO DE JANEIRO: 55-21-40421490 0800-7610651 BRAZIL SAO PAULO: 55-11-3958-0779 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CROATIA 080-08-06-309 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 36-1-700-8856 06-800-12755 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 ITALY ROME: 39-06-8751-6018 800-986-383 ITALY TORINO: 39-011-510-0118 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7878-2631 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-6868-2631 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 8002-9246 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO GUADALAJARA (JAL): 52-33-3208-7310 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MEXICO CITY: 52-55-5062-9110 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MONTERREY: 52-81-2482-0610 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 1800-111-42453 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 ROMANIA 40-31-630-01-79 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 0800-002066 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 TURKEY 00-800-151-0516 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 8000-35702370 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 VIETNAM 120-11751 Thank you. Kind Regards, Terri

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 | Tuesday, 13 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew Aug. 13, 2019

Aug. 13, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 held on Tuesday, 13 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/14LkBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members and alternates can join the call, observers can join via audio cast, listen to the recordings and read the transcript afterwards. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/IYEpBQ>. Thank you. With kind regards, Terri --- Terri Agnew Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: terri.agnew(a)icann.org<mailto:terri.agnew@icann.org> Skype ID: terri.agnew.icann Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwM…> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_cal…>

1 0

Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] On the subject of ICANN's Bylaws...
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 13, 2019

Aug. 13, 2019

I really do not understand why we are talking about to what extent Consumer Protection is within ICANN's mandate. We are talking about 3rd part use cases, not ICANN Purposes. No one thinks that phishing or law protection is in ICANN's mandate, but we are talking about use cases for people/organizations who ARE in the business to potentially access redacted data. If a domain is clearly that of a legal person, and the contact information is not that of natural persons, there is no balancing to be done. Having a use case does not imply that any information will be released. It means there MAY be a case for releasing the information, and that is all we are presuming. Information may be released if there is natural person information involved and the balancing ctest is met, or if there is no natural person information. Unless we change during phase 2, we are allowing a registrar to not distinguish between natural persons and legal persons in deciding what to redact (or not) from the public RDS. It does not imply that they could not make the distinction on a case-by-case basis. Alan At 12/08/2019 12:53 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote: I wish our positions were compatible. But I don’t think they are. Hadia (and Greg if I am not mistaken) are saying that the ALAC use case is justified because consumer protection is “in the global public interest.” My view, and apparently that of James Bladel and Alan Woods, is that the ALAC case seems to extend ICANN authority to general consumer protection which is outside the scope of ICANN’s mission. Actually there is an even stronger reason to discard this use case. In effect, advocates of this use case are saying that a consumer’s curiosity about who is behind a domain is sufficient cause to disclose protected data. I think this fails the 6.1.f balancing test prima facie. Curiosity does not outweigh a fundamental right, ever. Note well: the advocates of this use case are NOT saying that this is a remedy for fraud or some other form of actual consumer abuse. They say they need to expose this data BEFORE a transaction takes place, before fraud is even possible, because a consumer may be curious or feel uncertain about who is behind it. This is a very, very, very weak rationale, and I see no way that it passes a balancing test. Indeed, if that is a valid justification for disclosure, then we are back in the realm of the pre-GDPR Whois, because it means that anyone for any reason can be curious about who is behind a domain and might benefit from knowing the private data of the registrant. If we accept the ALAC 2 as a valid use case, we are back to pre-temp spec Whois. We all know that is not legal or acceptable. Dr. Milton L Mueller Georgia Institute of Technology School of Public Policy From: Mark Svancarek (CELA) <marksv(a)microsoft.com> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2019 12:40 PM To: Mueller, Milton L <milton(a)gatech.edu>; Greg Aaron <greg(a)illumintel.com>; gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-epdp-team] On the subject of ICANN's Bylaws... Milton, aren’t you and Greg (in this narrow topic) saying compatible things? - MiMu: Public interest is to be determined within MSM - GrAa: Let’s discuss this topic within EPDP From: Gnso-epdp-team < gnso-epdp-team-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Mueller, Milton L Sent: Monday, August 12, 2019 9:33 AM To: Greg Aaron <greg(a)illumintel.com<mailto:greg@illumintel.com>>; gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] On the subject of ICANN's Bylaws... All: Let me provide some background about Greg’s favorite section of the bylaws. He is fixated on the presence of three words he likes (global public interest) and not the actual meaning of the section. That core value emerged from a debate about the extent to which “the global public interest” was a meaningful guide to policy making. Those of us with extensive experience with regulatory systems around the world know that “public interest” is a blanket term that can be used to justify almost anything, from completely shutting down the internet to martial law to rate regulation. We knew as we were debating this that anyone can, and everyone does, claim that whatever policy they want is “in the public interest.” We did not want the Board to have the discretion to “divine” the public interest and use that divination to make policy unilaterally. There was, therefore a desire to carefully limit and bound public interest claims. Now look at what 1.2(b)iii actually says. It does NOT say that ICANN’s authority over Internet activity pertains to anything and everything that might be in the global public interest. It says that insofar as an ICANN policy is determined to be in the public interest, it must be so determined by a _bottom up, multistakeholder policy process_ and that such process must be _accountable and transparent_. In other words, this section of the bylaws only tells us _how_ the public interest in any given policy domain is to be ascertained. It does not expand ICANN’s mandate to include anything anyone thinks might be in the public interest. --MM From: Gnso-epdp-team < gnso-epdp-team-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Greg Aaron Sent: Monday, August 12, 2019 10:41 AM To: 'James M. Bladel' <jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>>; gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] On the subject of ICANN's Bylaws... Dear James: Thank you for your note. I can only speak to the comments I made in Thursday’s call. I did not reference ICANN’s Bylaws about “Competition and Consumer Trust” at all. Your references to Bylaws 4.6 are not relevant to my comments. Some members had stated that the ALAC use case should not even be discussed, because its premise is out of ICANN scope. I stated that it’s our obligation to talk about such issues. I referenced Bylaws 1.2(b)iii -- in the Core Values section � whicch says that the point of ICANN “policy development and decision-making [is] to ensure that the bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development process is used to ascertain the global public interest and that those processes are accountable and transparent”. My point was that as policy-makers, we are all obliged to apply that principle, especially since this working group is making decisions that will affect millions (if not billions) of people. It is a reminder for us to keep the big picture in mind, and that we’re here to ascertain what’s good for the Internet and discern what options exist within the law to serve that greater purpose. The SSAC has previously encouraged the ePDP to consider the impacts on how registrants and users interact for contactability, problem-solving, the avoidance of fraud, etc. In any case, the CCT Reviews you reference in Bylaws Section 4.6(d) are not the place to shunt all items that involve public impacts. According to the Bylaws, the CCT Reviews exist to examine only a limited set of things � basically CCT issues coming oout of the new gTLD program. Instead, any PDP can consider impacts on registrants and users as those issues come up within a WG’s charter. AFAIK our charter does not prohibit such. Your points below about alternate means are a contribution to the substantive debate, and thanks for them. But again, we can only have that debate if we all remember our main decision-making principles, and if issues are on the table in the first place, rather than kept off the table for some reason. All best, --Greg From: Gnso-epdp-team < gnso-epdp-team-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 11:47 AM To: gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] On the subject of ICANN's Bylaws... Good morning, Colleagues- During yesterday’s call, a few folks mentioned that ICANN’s Bylaws contain commitments to uphold “Competition” and “Consumer Choice/Consumer Trust”. These references to the Bylaws were offered in support of the proposed Use Case that RDS data should be a primary resource for consumers who are seeking to verify the operator of a website, or check the reputation of business, or to dispute a commercial transaction. For clarity, it’s worth noting that the predominant context for “competition” in ICANN’s Bylaws is specific to the domain name industry, esp. Registries and Registrars. And this makes sense, given that the industry prior to ICANN had no concept of “competition” or “consumer choice”; all domain transactions were handled by a single provider. Additionally, mentions of “consumer protection”, “consumer choice”, and “consumer trust” within the Bylaws are contained within Section 4.6(d), which outlines the “Periodic Reviews”, and are an element of the 2012 New gTLD program. These sections were ported to the Bylaws from the Affirmation of Commitments, and were drafted when many feared that new gTLDs would confuse consumers and undermine trust/confidence in the DNS. Taken together, it’s not correct to conclude that WHOIS/RDS data is intended to replace or preempt more widely recognized alternative tools for online consumers, like: * SSL certificates, verified by Certificate Authorities (CA) and supported by all modern browsers * Trust certificates (issued by organizations like the Better Business Bureau, Trustwave, McAffee, SiteLock, and card processors like Visa/Mastercard) * Reputation/review services like Google ratings, Yelp, and Facebook or Amazon reviews, and * The “About Us” or “Contact Us” or “Customer Support” links on merchant websites, which are omnipresent for legitimate businesses and required by law in many areas. But if this is still a point of divergence among the EPDP members, then perhaps we could consult ICANN Legal about the extent of their “Competition” and “Consumer Trust” mandate, and whether they believe ICANN is on the hook for the integrity & consumer satisfaction for all commercial activity taking place anywhere on the Internet. J. ------------- James Bladel GoDaddy _______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

3 2

Notes and action items - EPDP Phase 2 Meeting #13 - 13 August 2019
by Caitlin Tubergen Aug. 13, 2019

Aug. 13, 2019

Dear EPDP Team, Below, please find the notes and action items from today’s EPDP Team meeting. As a reminder, the next EPDP Phase 2 meeting will be Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 14:00 UTC. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- EPDP Phase 2 - Project Plan Meeting Tuesday, 13 August 2019 at 14.00 UTC Notes These high-level notes are designed to help the EPDP Team navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/ZwPVBQ. EPDP Phase 2 - Meeting #13 Proposed Agenda Tuesday, 13 August 2019 at 14.00 UTC 1. 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) · Attendance will be taken by the Zoom room 2. 2. Confirmation of agenda (Chair) 3. 3. Welcome and housekeeping issues (Chair) (5 minutes) · a. Chair Introduction · Purpose of the meeting is to inform the Team of the project plan that will be submitted to the GNSO Council for approval · Following Berry’s introduction and explanation, there will be time for questions. · The work plan is not carved in stone and will be updated, as necessary. 4. 4. Review of EPDP-P2 Project Management and Work plan Package (45 minutes) · a. Overview of work products · There is a requirement for the GNSO Council to approve the Team’s work plan for the Phase 2 efforts. This is the first time the Council has required this, and this aligns with the PDP 3.0 efforts that are underway. · It would be helpful to send the project plan to the Council for its meeting next week. · This is near the first time that a GNSO PDP effort received additional funding/resources outside of the standard PDP process. · This is the first formal time where there is a regimented project plan approach to managing the group. There will likely be many bumps in the road, but the goal is to change the culture in the GNSO in developing its projects. · In May, the Team was referencing a mind map that referenced the charter questions and other activities. Many of the same ideas informed the project plan; for example, a high-level approach was developed: · Priority 1 items (related to SSAD); and · Priority 2 items (items carried over from Phase 1) · As part of the initial approach, there was a high-level timeline that was introduced - an initial report released in December, and prepare a final report to be delivered on or after ICANN67 · The first work product is a summary timeline; this was used in Phase 1, but it has been enhanced for Phase 2. It is a rolling timeline that is edited throughout the process. · The aspirational dates are carried over (Initial Report - December; Final Report - March) · The second work product is a fact sheet, which was born from the CCWG days. It is now used for all of the review teams in the MSSI department. · One thing to note is the financial resources. Coming out of Kobe, the Council requested funds to carry the Team through FY19 (Marrakech) · The Council also requested additional funding to prepare for the F2F - the request was due to the advance notice to plan for the F2F. · Will be updated on a monthly basis. · The third work product is the project situation report, which is part of the GNSO Council’s Project List. · This is a communication vehicle to the GNSO Council. · The point is to, at a high-level, create an information gateway to important links, and what the status and condition of the project are. · The status is connected to the schedule. · The condition of the project will show as “on target”, “at risk”, or “in trouble”. External factors can affect a project’s condition that have nothing to do with the schedule. · If a project is at risk or in trouble, that may necessitate a discussion with Leadership and the GNSO Council. · The bottom right-hand side is meant to tell the audience what the Team is currently working on, what it plans to work on, and what it completed in the last report. · The fourth work product is the project plan · b. Deeper review of the summary and full Gantt chart project plan · The left hand side includes the task description · The Gantt chart is a visual depiction of the project, including dependencies. · The black lines help group parent tasks and the child tasks that sit underneath it · If, for any reason, there is a potential for tasks in the critical path to be missed, this allows us to see what the downstream effects of missing the task are. · If, for example, in late October, there is an unplanned topic, which added three weeks to the timeline. Once the dependency is created, it will show what the revised planned delivery date would be. This helps to manage unplanned events or unplanned delays and show what the effect of the delay would be. · Looking back at the fact sheet and situation report, this shows four broad buckets to show percentage complete. · Unlike other PDPs, this has resources assigned to it. The Project Cost Support Team, or PCST, manages additional needs. · The EPDP deliberation section is the core of the Team’s work - as deliberations or outcomes occur, those outcomes are being fed into an initial report. (The first task of the initial report is for Support Staff to populate an initial draft of the report.) · All tasks are built on a five business-day work week, even though the Team has about 3.5 hours of deliberations per week. If a task says “10 days”, that is two business weeks, but it’s ultimately just under 8 hours of actual deliberation time. · There could be discussions around geographic basis or Thick WHOIS - if these topics are added, these would be migrated into Priority 1 or Priority 2 deliberations. · c. Overview of Use Case and Dedicated Topic approach (explains early stage of critical path) · This is a quick mock-up of the use cases the Team is currently working on. Column A, for example, is the LEA use case. · The Team is currently working from a top-down nature, or the green, vertical arrows. Ultimately, the Team will have preliminary agreement or decide that some of the use cases are not applicable. · As the Team continues reviewing use cases, there are some topics, like accreditation, that are unlikely to be discussed fully by deliberating on a use case. · The Team will then move from a left to right perspective, or the red, horizontal arrows. · Not all topics listed in the use case touch on all of the charter questions · The Team is not expected to look at the Gantt chart, though it is welcome to · It is not meant for consumption, except for the Leadership Team to manage its timeline and resources · d. Overview of work plan and action items log · The last work product, or the Work Plan and AIs log - shows tasks and related action items, who the action item is assigned to and when things are due. · Here is a link to the Work Plan and Action Items log: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/179ocCF6XHK48CJaFF4Rdg9T3atQKFeY51zw… · Questions from the EPDP Team · The project file will be posted as a PDF on the wiki · Action: Berry will produce an exploded version, a collapsed version, and post the raw file. · What is the utility of going through all of use cases? Perhaps after one example from each of the groups, the Team take stock and make a determination whether the discussion of more use cases is necessary at that point in time. · Use cases are being used to better understand the issues and complexities and developing building blocks. · The idea is to distribute the “zero draft” in advance of the LA F2F meeting · The Team may need to ask its legal questions very soon. What is the legal budget right now, and how much of it have we spent? · The Board has currently approved 50K for legal expenses, and it has not been used. · 50K does not seem like enough money as there are many legal questions the Team will need to ask. · 50K was allotted in the initial request. If the plan gets signed off at the Council, the next budget request can be made, and it is likely there will be a sizeable legal budget requested. · This project plan will now be submitted to the GNSO Council for its approval 5. 5. Any other business (5 minutes) 6. 6. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting: · a. Reminder: Thursday 15 August 2019 at 14.00 UTC (5 minutes) · b. Confirm action items

1 0