August 2021 - Gnso-epdp-team

**REMINDER** Meeting Invitation | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A call | Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 16, 2021

Aug. 16, 2021

Dear all, The GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call is scheduled on Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Zoom room information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5E…> Passcode: Z@S07?t=v5 If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile US: +13126266799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# or +13462487799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# Webinar ID: 921 8147 7886 Passcode: 3121016458 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI__;!!PtGJab4!u…> Members, alternates, observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call * Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only * Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior [icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/HQMuCg * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/78n6p2ah [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/78n6p2ah__;!!PtGJab4!tLRRFcp…> ONLY for Members and Alternates * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Alternate replacement confirmations – In order to keep track of alternate replacements, use the google form [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_a_ican…> to communicate who the alternate is replacing and for which period. This information will be publicly posted so that the EPDP Team is aware at any time who is active. Alternate Assignment – EPDP Phase 2A wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/h4jzC>. * Members (and alternates replacing members), please select Panelists and Attendees when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. * Alternates not replacing a member: Please rename your line by adding THREE Zs - (zzz)’before your name and add, in parentheses at the end, (your affiliation - alternate). To rename in Zoom, hover over your name and click ‘rename’. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat (apart from private chats) or use any of the other zoom room functionalities such as raising hands or agreeing / disagreeing. Only for Observers: * Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands. Thank you. Kind regards, Andrea

1 0

Notes and action items - EPDP Phase 2A meeting #35 - 12 August 2021
by Caitlin Tubergen Aug. 12, 2021

Aug. 12, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s call. The next EPDP Phase 2A call will be Tuesday, 17 August at 14:00 UTC. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- ⚠️ Action Items<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17qLMYb3HC7qGYPQveXbUq5ZSzvedrQ3t8Ad…> ⚠️ 1. EPDP Team to review the draft section 3 (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit#) focusing on the tables that have been inserted for recs #1 - #5 and use the orange tables to provide your group’s input by COB Monday, 16 August. 2. Reminder: EPDP Team members to indicate benefits and operational challenges of a (i) legal v. natural differentiation and (ii) standardized data element within the dedicated Google Doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L-SdgAb0tJlGJoBbuRWHuKSuZRIdXnia/edit> by COB Friday, 13 August. EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #35 Proposed Agenda Thursday 12 August 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) 3. Initial Report Public Comment Review (15 minutes) a. EPDP Team Question for Community Input #5 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18_TwHMQSnV9fWryJZJdTP0awO-FRUZ5L/edit> · #2 * Public comment from ICANN org: Should the EPDP Team decide to change its recommendation from guidance to a requirement, there may be difficulties enforcing this without full access to registration data. * In the Phase 1 Report, thought that ICANN can have access to the information * Recommendation 1, Purpose 5 covers the compliance purpose – do not think additional language is needed at this time to let compliance do their job · #4 * Input received from SSAC – further suggestions for registrars who would deploy these methods * Should incorporate additional safeguards into the recommendation * The use of this is not yet fleshed out completely – more work is needed to sort out the details. The business of email contacts has a conflation of two separate and distinct objections: contacting and correlating. These need to be disentangled and worked through separately. * Realistically, there are a lot of registrars that are already doing this via their privacy/proxy services – a registrant-based email contact. Why can this not be accepted as published since registrars are already doing this? * Do not understand the above point with respect to privacy/proxy – please clarify. * There are a number of P/P services that are affiliated with registrars that already publish an anonymized registrant-based email address and are doing so in compliance with GDPR. Because a number of registrars are doing this already, do not understand why registrant-based email publication cannot be recommended. * Rec. 5 – any suggestion that the email address is the only way to do this without also including the webform option is problematic. The recommendation on the screen is OK as is. * There is a consideration to think about changing from a “should” to a “must” – consider changing it * The pseudonymized email address should be public if it is being used by the registrar * Should be careful not to assume that just because a registrar is doing something that the behavior is lawful * Support Staff will include this recommendation in table format, and EPDP Team members may propose updated language if there are suggestions 4. Commence review and updates to section 3 of Final Report - Responses to Council Questions & Recommendations (60 minutes) – see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit#<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit> As a reminder: proposed timeline to get to Final Report 10 August – complete review of public comments 12 August – delivery of action items mediated conversations, confirm possible suggestions for further consideration. 17 & 19 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 24 & 26 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 27 August – publish draft Final Report for EPDP Team review, consensus call. 30 August – deadline for minority statements 31 August – finalize report and address any outstanding items, if any. a. Recommendation #1 · Consider input provided * Thank you to all who have commenced review of the tables. * The first comment BC provided and the RySG provided refer to the preceding sections of the report. Suggest to park that language for now and refer to the language in the table instead. * The positions outlined in the report were mainly intended to help inform the public comment forum. Would it make sense to remove that part and instead have the minority statements reflect the differing views? · EPDP Team discussion * Recommendation 1 * It may be useful to go through the suggestions for further consideration and see if the group supports any of them. For example, can the group discuss the change from may to “encouraged”. The words matter, and the output would be the same, but prefer the use of encouraged. * Agree to take out the background commentary and keep the recommendations and report clean. * Agreement to remove the commentary. * BC proposed text: Delete this: “In their view, no evidence has been presented identifying the problems that mandatory differentiation would solve, or indeed if mandatory differentiation would solve them at all.” Delete: “Therefore, no changes are recommended, which means that the EPDP Phase 1 recommendation will remain as is.” and replace with: “Following up on Recommendation 17.3 of the EPDP’s Phase 1 Final Report, the EPDP Team was unable to resolve the Legal vs. Natural issue in Phase 2.” * Not sure that this new text is necessary – the team was asked to determine if any updates are needed to the EPDP Phase 1 recommendation – the answer is no * The way this text currently reads is that optional is the default. The report would be incomplete if the last part of this suggested is not included. There are many groups in this Team that believe there should be a change – the report would be incomplete without reference to 17.3. * There is a paradox – if we say the rec. stands as written, it is a paradox. Need to say that the issue was not resolved since Rec. 17 says – the issue will be resolved in Phase 2. To say the recommendation stands, which made a prediction that turned out to be false, is incorrect. * Do not understand what would resolve this issue. * Note that the team erred in Phase 1 – not asking for substantive change in how this will be treated but believe the historical record should be correct. * Do not think the recommendation say it would be resolved, said it would be addressed. * This is a pedantic logic problem – in Phase 1, it was not addressed and not resolved. If you say in Phase 2A, there is no change to not addressed and not resolved. * The recommendation should not be written in a way that there is consensus to that statement – it won’t actually change anything. * Noting that 17.3 is a separate part of the recommendation means that permissive differentiation is not the end state * This was a 3-part recommendation to highlight that the second part of the recommendation was the request for ICANN org to undertake a study on the topic. From the staff perspective – 1 is where we currently stand, 2 is expected to help inform further considerations, 3 – having reviewed the study and further discussions – are further changes needed – whether or not this is resolved or not is not something the Staff Support Team should opine on. * What is the issue to be resolved? The way that 17.3 is being read does not do justice to what the recommendation – 1. A rec is made. 2. There is an outstanding element to review, 3. Based on the element to be reviewed, does a change need to be made? This is resolved. * The report should accurately describe what happened – that is what this updated language is trying to get at. * Some of this discussion may need to be relegated to minority statements. There was not consensus to change 17.1 – * Groups to propose language in the Google Doc. * Consider recommending that an update is made to the EPDP Phase 1 recommendation to say that Contracted Parties are encouraged to differentiate instead of “may differentiate”. (leadership team assessment: this is a new suggestion that has not been discussed in detail. Leadership team proposes to assess at one of the upcoming meetings whether there is interest to further consider this suggestion and whether there is a likelihood that it would receive broad support) * Is anyone opposed to the inclusion of the language “encouraged to”? * Do not support this – this is an opinion and is more appropriate for a minority statement. * There are different opinions of what should be in a report and what shouldn’t * There does not appear to be support for this suggestion * Staff Support Team is aware of the concerns in the Initial Report, but thought that it was a concern over the use of the term recommendation. This has now been changed to a response to the GNSO Council. · Confirm next steps b. Recommendation #2 · Consider input provided · EPDP Team discussion * With respect to Recommendation 2, the Staff Support Team proposed edits based on the Team’s discussion. * BC Suggestions Support the trigger that would restart the EPDP once the NIS2 Directive is adopted, with the recommendation of forming a scoping team, as per the third bullet above. * The language as written does not bind the Council to a specific action. * Even if the Council adopts this, it does not create a requirement to the Council – it’s an encouragement, but the decision to form a scoping team or EPDP ultimately rests with the GNSO Council. * Appreciate the rewording and captures a compromise following the mediated discussion – important to respect GNSO processes · Confirm next steps c. Recommendation #3 (if time allows) · Consider input provided · EPDP Team discussion * We are likely to agree on the existence of an element but not the use of the element. If we consider it as a package, it’s likely that most cannot support. * There is a technical RDAP working group, and that would be the group that would work on this, provided they are giving appropriate direction from a policy recommendation. Is there sufficient language in here to allow them to take action on this? * In Rec. 4, there is language that overlaps slightly with Rec. 3. The standardized element discussed in Rec. 4 is more workable and directional. Still working on a proposal for new language and will share with the group as soon as there is something that there is agreement on. * Do not believe the kind element is a good fit. · Confirm next steps - If you believe there should be a standardized data element, please explain the benefits. What would the benefit be for the specific proposal that is being considered. - Continue to review the tables, factoring in the discussion today. By working through the Google Doc, hope the group can find common areas of agreement. Staff Support has also worked on the table for rec. 4 – have seen some suggestions on the list – will post them there. - Support Staff Team will post the table from Rec. 5 – we do not have suggestions based on the discussion today, but please continue to post proposals. d. Confirm next steps 5. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): a. EPDP Team Meeting #36 Tuesday 17 August at 14.00 UTC b. Confirm action items 1. Please continue to review the draft section 3 (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit#) focusing on the tables that have been inserted for recs #1 - #5 and use the orange tables to provide your group’s input by COB Monday, 16 August. 2. Reminder: EPDP Team members to indicate benefits and operational challenges of a (i) legal v. natural differentiation and (ii) standardized data element within the dedicated Google Doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L-SdgAb0tJlGJoBbuRWHuKSuZRIdXnia/edit> by COB Friday, 13 August. c. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A | Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Aug. 12, 2021

Aug. 12, 2021

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call held on Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/4oMZCg> and the GNSO Master calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…>. 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 as a panelist, observers can join as an attendee to listen. 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 | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A call | Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Aug. 12, 2021

Aug. 12, 2021

Dear all, The GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call is scheduled on Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Zoom room information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5E…> Passcode: Z@S07?t=v5 If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile US: +13126266799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# or +13462487799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# Webinar ID: 921 8147 7886 Passcode: 3121016458 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI__;!!PtGJab4!u…> Members, alternates, observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call * Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only * Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior [icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/HQMuCg * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/78n6p2ah ONLY for Members and Alternates * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Alternate replacement confirmations – In order to keep track of alternate replacements, use the google form [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_a_ican…> to communicate who the alternate is replacing and for which period. This information will be publicly posted so that the EPDP Team is aware at any time who is active. Alternate Assignment – EPDP Phase 2A wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/h4jzC>. * Members (and alternates replacing members), please select Panelists and Attendees when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. * Alternates not replacing a member: Please rename your line by adding THREE Zs - (zzz)’before your name and add, in parentheses at the end, (your affiliation - alternate). To rename in Zoom, hover over your name and click ‘rename’. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat (apart from private chats) or use any of the other zoom room functionalities such as raising hands or agreeing / disagreeing. Only for Observers: * Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands. Thank you. Kind regards, Andrea

1 0

**Meeting begins in 15 minutes** Meeting Invitation | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A call | Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Aug. 12, 2021

Aug. 12, 2021

Dear all, The GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call is scheduled on Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Zoom room information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5E…> Passcode: Z@S07?t=v5 If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile US: +13126266799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# or +13462487799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# Webinar ID: 921 8147 7886 Passcode: 3121016458 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI__;!!PtGJab4!u…> Members, alternates, observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call * Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only * Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior [icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/4oMZCg * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/4d4mtx94 [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/4d4mtx94__;!!PtGJab4!pJXi5Wm…> ONLY for Members and Alternates * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Alternate replacement confirmations – In order to keep track of alternate replacements, use the google form [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_a_ican…> to communicate who the alternate is replacing and for which period. This information will be publicly posted so that the EPDP Team is aware at any time who is active. Alternate Assignment – EPDP Phase 2A wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/h4jzC>. * Members (and alternates replacing members), please select Panelists and Attendees when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. * Alternates not replacing a member: Please rename your line by adding THREE Zs - (zzz)’before your name and add, in parentheses at the end, (your affiliation - alternate). To rename in Zoom, hover over your name and click ‘rename’. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat (apart from private chats) or use any of the other zoom room functionalities such as raising hands or agreeing / disagreeing. Only for Observers: * Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands. Thank you. Kind regards, Andrea

1 0

Rec 4 suggested text
by LEWIS-EVANS, Christopher Aug. 12, 2021

Aug. 12, 2021

OFFICIAL Suggested text for recommendation 4 as discussed on the last call, believe it should go between current 2 and 3. Thanks Chris The GDPR protects natural persons in relation to the processing of their personal data. "It does not cover the processing of personal data which concerns legal persons and in particular undertakings established as legal persons, including the name and the form of the legal person and the contact details of the legal person." This allows for disclosure of legal persons' data because it is outside the remit of GDPR. Nevertheless, when processing legal persons' data, safeguards should be put in place to ensure that personally identifying data about a natural person is not disclosed within data marked as a legal person. This information is supplied in confidence by the NCA. The NCA is not listed as a Public Authority under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Any information supplied by, or relating to, the NCA is also subject to an absolute exemption. It may also be subject to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, for example, under data protection legislation. Requests for disclosure to the public must be referred to the NCA FOI single point of contact, by email on StatutoryDisclosureTeam(a)nca.gov.uk. All email sent and received by the NCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by NCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring. Email may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within the NCA, on authority from the Director General or their Deputy for analysis. This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible.

3 2

**REMINDER** Meeting Invitation | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A call | Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 11, 2021

Aug. 11, 2021

Dear all, The GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call is scheduled on Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Zoom room information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5E…> Passcode: Z@S07?t=v5 If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile US: +13126266799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# or +13462487799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# Webinar ID: 921 8147 7886 Passcode: 3121016458 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI__;!!PtGJab4!u…> Members, alternates, observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call * Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only * Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior [icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/4oMZCg * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/4d4mtx94 [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/4d4mtx94__;!!PtGJab4!pJXi5Wm…> ONLY for Members and Alternates * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Alternate replacement confirmations – In order to keep track of alternate replacements, use the google form [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_a_ican…> to communicate who the alternate is replacing and for which period. This information will be publicly posted so that the EPDP Team is aware at any time who is active. Alternate Assignment – EPDP Phase 2A wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/h4jzC>. * Members (and alternates replacing members), please select Panelists and Attendees when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. * Alternates not replacing a member: Please rename your line by adding THREE Zs - (zzz)’before your name and add, in parentheses at the end, (your affiliation - alternate). To rename in Zoom, hover over your name and click ‘rename’. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat (apart from private chats) or use any of the other zoom room functionalities such as raising hands or agreeing / disagreeing. Only for Observers: * Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands. Thank you. Kind regards, Andrea

1 0

Proposed Agenda - EPDP Team meeting #35 on Thursday 12 August at 14.00 UTC
by Marika Konings Aug. 10, 2021

Aug. 10, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next EPDP Team meeting, which has been scheduled for Thursday 12 August at 14.00 UTC. As a reminder, please review the draft section 3 that now has been posted (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit#) focusing on the tables that have been inserted for recs #1 - #3 and using the orange tables to provide your group’s input in advance of Thursday’s meeting. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #35 Proposed Agenda Thursday 12 August 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) 3. Initial Report Public Comment Review (15 minutes) * EPDP Team Question for Community Input #5 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18_TwHMQSnV9fWryJZJdTP0awO-FRUZ5L/edit> · #2 · #4 * Additional Comments – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ido40sJSe2p1bRQirUg8wJ02DWL-me1-/edit> · None 4. Commence review and updates to section 3 of Final Report - Responses to Council Questions & Recommendations (60 minutes) – see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit#<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit> As a reminder: proposed timeline to get to Final Report 10 August – complete review of public comments 12 August – delivery of action items mediated conversations, confirm possible suggestions for further consideration. 17 & 19 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 24 & 26 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 27 August – publish draft Final Report for EPDP Team review, consensus call. 30 August – deadline for minority statements 31 August – finalize report and address any outstanding items, if any. a. Recommendation #1 · Consider input provided · EPDP Team discussion · Confirm next steps b. Recommendation #2 · Consider input provided · EPDP Team discussion · Confirm next steps c. Recommendation #3 (if time allows) · Consider input provided · EPDP Team discussion · Confirm next steps d. Confirm next steps 5. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): a. EPDP Team Meeting #36 Tuesday 17 August at 14.00 UTC b. Confirm action items c. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

Notes and action items - EPDP Phase 2A Meeting #34 - 10 Aug 2021
by Caitlin Tubergen Aug. 10, 2021

Aug. 10, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next EPDP Phase 2A meeting will be Thursday, 12 August at 14:00 UTC. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- ⚠️ Action Items<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17qLMYb3HC7qGYPQveXbUq5ZSzvedrQ3t8Ad…>⚠️ 1. EPDP Team members to indicate benefits and operational challenges of a (i) legal v. natural differentiation and (ii) standardized data element within the dedicated Google Doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L-SdgAb0tJlGJoBbuRWHuKSuZRIdXnia/edit> by COB Friday, 13 August. ⚠️⚠️Note: this is an extension from the original due date of Wednesday, 11 August.⚠️⚠️ 2. EPDP to review Section 3 of the Draft Final Report document<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit#h…>, particularly the tables associated with Recommendations 1 - 3, in advance of our next meeting on Thursday, 12 August. Note: if EPDP Team Members have comments on the tables, please provide feedback IN COMMENT FORM and please do not redline or provide comments on the rest of the document at this time. EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #34 Proposed Agenda Tuesday 10 August 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) - The Leadership Team did not receive any requests for a project change request extension. Leadership requested the if anyone believed an extension was necessary, they needed to put a request and accompanying rationale in writing. - Accordingly, the Team will be working to the dates shown on the screen – with a goal of submitting the Final Report by 2 September. - We will go back to focusing on the public comment review. When we get to the later parts of the agenda, we have a new template and document review to share. 3. Initial Report Public Comment Review (65 minutes) a. EPDP Team Question for Community Input #4 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/111EAx9BuJphPwM22wsvG_oRxj27-r20r/edit> * There are still some comments to go through – we will pick up where we left off (Preliminary Recommendation #4 – the specific guidance for contracted parties who choose to differentiate.) There were four questions asked for community input – 1. Does this guidance as written provide sufficient information and resources to Registrars and Registry Operators who wish to differentiate? If not, what is missing and why? 2. Are there additional elements that should be included? 3. Are there legal and regulatory considerations not yet considered in this Initial Report, that may inform Registries and Registrars in deciding whether and how to differentiate, and if so, how? 4. If a Registrar or Registry Operator decides to differentiate, should this guidance become a requirement that can be enforced if not followed ("MUST, if Contracted Party decides to differentiate")? · #2 (GAC, BC, ALAC) * Should this be referred to as best practices instead of guidance? * BC would like the language changed from guidance to best practices. Remind the group that the GNSO PDP manual does not list guidance as an appropriate outcome of a PDP but does list best practices. * The concern about best practices is that the word has a specific legal meaning in certain jurisdictions – specifically, if a CP chooses not to follow a best practice in certain jurisdictions, they will be subjected to liability. * Can accept guidance of a voluntary nature, but this is a restatement of the law – not sure how this could be considered “best practices” – it is not clear what is best or good here. More input is needed. * Agree that a code of conduct should be pursued as part of the outcomes of this policy process. The notion of guidance came along after the EPDP was started. The Board’s instructions were to create consensus policy, not to create guidance. * Thought we were going through public comments and flagging new information – do not see additional or new information here – this is simply rehashing an issue that we debated months ago. Suggest making a note and moving on. * PDP Manual does allow for guidance, contrary to previous comments, as the list is not exhaustive. · #3 (ALAC, BC) * ICANN org notes that if there are requirements in this guidance (for example must if), they need to be specifically called out, or the guidance would not be enforced. * When looking at the Initial Report – one question is the team is not recommending requirements, but from org’s perspective – if a registry or registrar chooses to follow the best practices, do they have to follow some or all of the guidance, or if they differentiate, do they have to follow them at all? · #5 (BC, ALAC) * There should be a requirement to classify a registrant as natural or legal, and until the time comes for all registrations, an unspecified classification could be used until a specific time in the domain name lifecycle, such as renewal or WDRP notice. * If differentiation occurs, this should happen during registration. If it happens after registration, it puts a burden on contracted parties and registrants. Many CPs do not engage with the registrant again after registration happens. They may engage during the renewal of the domain name. * This is problematic because if there is one thing that is helpful for implementation it is having options. There is no need to necessitate a determination at the point of registration. * Registries do not have contact with registrants in this process, and this is asking registries to process more data. This statement by SSAC – registrants being classified as legal vs. natural persons ignores the concept that legal persons can still have personal information in their registration data. * SSAC is recommending that there be a classification regardless of it is used by the registrant/registrar. If that is correct, this makes sense, given that the NIS2 directive will require a designation. * The idea of including the data element in the data dictionary is straightforward – the data dictionary is not owned by the GNSO or Contracted Parties. There ought to be a data element that defines this. The separate question is whether this should be required or even offered – this is something that needs to be settled within these discussions. Some colleagues may fervently wish that this be required – there is greater complexity – even if you know it’s a natural person, that does not tell you if the data should be redacted. There are three parts to this: should it be in the data dictionary? Yes. Should it be required? Open question. How is this available via public inquiries? This is also an open question that is thus far not very well sorted out. · #7 (IPC, BC, ALAC) * The guidance does not recognize the differentiation b/w legal and natural person data. The guidance does not state that the GDPR does not apply to the data of natural persons. Adding this guidance would be very beneficial – making it clearer that legal person data is not covered under GDPR. * What does ICANN do when NIS2 is approved? That discussion will focus on mandatory differentiation. It makes sense to anticipate this – state what the GDPR already says and set the table to what we will eventually have to do – address NIS2 requirements. * As guidance, it would be useful to registrars who do not actively follow this work to have it clear that GDPR does not apply to legal persons. * Do not find this useful – what would find useful is an explanation of what data is required to be protected and what the consequences of getting it wrong are. Willing to review suggested text; however, difficult to respond to the suggestion without seeing suggested text. * Action: GAC colleagues to put forward specific text · #9 (BC, RySG) * This comment is incorrect – there is nothing in the Chinese law that requires a differentiation between legal and natural persons. It requires a real name, but does not require stating legal v. natural. * No one is advocating for the release of all personal information. · #12 (BC) * Have not dug into what contractually could reduce risk. This is an area where the Team could do additional work to increase the safeguards. * In response to comments from the RrSG, this is the appropriate place to consider changes to Phase 1 policy recommendations. · #14 (BC) * The NIS2 is something that should be factored in as part of these recommendations. · #16 (BC) * Comment from the GAC – importance of stating benefits of releasing data to the public. * The GDPR states this best in terms of proposed language. It would be acceptable to quote article 14. Explicitly states that the regulation does not cover the processing of personal data of legal persons. * How do we reconcile ambiguity in recital 14 with letter from DPAs to ICANN re personal data contained in legal person’s registration data? * This recital is part of the GDPR, and do not think that a letter can trump the explicit language of the regulation. * Recital 14 talks about no protections afforded to legal entities. When there are details of natural persons enshrined in the data of a legal person – acknowledge once and for all that recital 14 does not help with this policy discussion. * A letter does not trump a regulation, but the regulation states that personal information of private individuals must be protected, irrespective of where it is maintained * Recital 14 forms the basis of why we are asking to differentiate between legal and natural persons * Action: proposal for further text on the list · #17 (BC) * Important to highlight why it would be useful to adopt the guidance · #18 (BC) · #20 (BC) * ICANN should have policy that support NIS2 – the policy restart would require a new PDP, and that PDP could be blocked by parties in the GNSO that do not agree. When NIS2 is adopted by the parliament, this should be a trigger to restart the PDP. Do not know the right mechanism to restart the PDP when NIS2 is adopted. Best to resume the work at the appropriate time and cannot be blocked from doing the work at the appropriate time. * Ask that members stop imputing statements regarding what they expect other parties to be doing. Given the current drafting of the NIS2, what actually in policy of ICANN prevents CPs from following NIS2? * The Team should be laying the appropriate groundwork for future GNSO action; this would show that the team’s intentions are correct. * GAC supports requirement of differentiation · #21 (BC) b. EPDP Team Question for Community Input #5 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18_TwHMQSnV9fWryJZJdTP0awO-FRUZ5L/edit> · #2 (BC) · #4 (BC) c. Additional Comments – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ido40sJSe2p1bRQirUg8wJ02DWL-me1-/edit> · None 1. Next Steps & Approach (10 minutes) * The proposed timeline to get to the Final Report is included in the agenda -- the only addition is the deadline for minority statements of 30 August. * Hope to cover the remaining public comments during Thursday’s meeting. * On Monday, Staff Support circulated the draft Final Report minus Section 3 – most changes were of an administrative nature. What we will review separately is Section 3. * Based on the conversations from the group, the Support Staff Team has included tables into Section 3 of the report. * Support Staff created a table that includes initial report language and underneath that is a list of possible suggestions based on public comment review and mediated conversation. From that, Leadership Team has made an assessment based on the support a suggestion had. This assessment has resulted in proposed updates to the recommendation language. For Rec. 1, for example, there was a suggestion that as nothing is recommended in Rec. 1, this should be labelled as a response rather than a recommendation. As a reminder: proposed timeline to get to Final Report 10 August – complete review of public comments 12 August – delivery of action items mediated conversations, confirm possible suggestions for further consideration. 17 & 19 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 24 & 26 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 27 August – publish draft Final Report for EPDP Team review, consensus call. 30 August – deadline for minority statements 31 August – finalize report and address any outstanding items, if any. a. Proposed approach for reviewing possible suggestions and updates to recommendations b. Final Report minus section 3 available for review c. EPDP Team input d. Confirm next steps 5. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): a. EPDP Team Meeting #35 Thursday 12 August at 14.00 UTC b. Confirm action items * EPDP Team members to indicate benefits and operational challenges of a (i) legal v. natural differentiation and (ii) standardized data element within the dedicated Google Doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L-SdgAb0tJlGJoBbuRWHuKSuZRIdXnia/edit> by COB Friday, 13 August. Note: there has been an extension from the original due date of Wednesday, 11 August. * EPDP to review Section 3 of the Draft Final Report document<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2RIAEonzE3vA1cN5lep9sZl2pKEniT6/edit#h…>, particularly the tables associated with Recommendations 1 - 3, in advance of our next meeting on Thursday, 12 August. Note: if EPDP Team Members have comments on the tables, please provide feedback IN COMMENT FORM and please do not redline or provide comments on the rest of the document at this time. c. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A | Tuesday, 10 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Aug. 10, 2021

Aug. 10, 2021

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call held on Tuesday, 10 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/9QEuCg> and the GNSO Master calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…>. 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 as a panelist, observers can join as an attendee to listen. 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