I also appreciate the nice logical summary of options, Steve.

Like Volker, however, I believe that you are overlooking the fact that we have debated these options for months and have arrived firmly at option 7 (there is no distinction between 7 and 8, by the way). Only 7 is possible, because that was the agreed outcome of phase 1 while we explored other options in Phase 2. In Phase 2 we discovered we cannot attain sufficient agreement to move off of that equilibrium.

Some EPDP members will recall that I personally indicated a willingness to move toward something like #6. This did not fly. Neither the Contracted Parties nor my own SG would accept it, and the GAC, ALAC and two CSG constituencies still wanted something more like 1 or 2.

The legal/natural issue is resolved; we are at 7. We need to accept this reality, and move on the develop an SSAD that will earn the support of all groups.


Dr Milton L Mueller, Professor

School of Public Policy

Georgia Institute of Technology

Internet Governance Project 



From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Volker Greimann via Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 5, 2021 4:41 PM
To: Steve Crocker <steve@shinkuro.com>
Cc: EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] A short note on possible outcomes re Natural, Legal or Unspecified
 
Hi Steve,

I fail to see how this admittedly succinct summary of the existing options helps us move ahead the discussion as this basically only reflects the discussions we have over the past months.
At this point, we are likely either at option 7 or 8, which incidentally also describe the status quo.

The real issues start after making these basic definitions as there are complexities down the line following from the designations:
a) In case of C or O, does that lead to partial publication based on the designation? Does it lead to forwarding the designation to the registries? How would/should the registries treat those designations received? Can they rely on them? Will they rely on them without burdening registrars with further liability and indemnification requirements?
b) What happens down the road? Will agreeing to optional fields immediately lead to calls for them to be made into requirements by future work?

Best,
-- 
Volker A. Greimann
General Counsel and Policy Manager
KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH

T: +49 6894 9396901
M: +49 6894 9396851
F: +49 6894 9396851
W: www.key-systems.net

Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local court of Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no. HR B 18835
CEO: Oliver Fries and Robert Birkner

Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company registered in England and Wales with company number 8576358.

This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended only for the person(s) directly addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, transmission, distribution, or other forms of dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete this email with any files that may be attached.



On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 5:26 PM Steve Crocker via Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> wrote:
The attached note is a summary of the possible policies regarding Natural vs Legal vs Unspecified
_______________________________________________
Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
Gnso-epdp-team@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.