Thanks, Matt. In relation to action item #2, would it be possible for the RrSG to provide specific suggestions to how the language could be improved in line with your comments? Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika From: Matt Serlin <matt@brandsight.com> Date: Monday, October 29, 2018 at 3:50 PM To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Please review - action items and outstanding items Dear all, Below are RrSG comments/feedback on each of the requested action items due today: Action Item #2 (legal v. natural persons) – based on the discussions we had in Barcelona, it was our understanding this language was going to continue to be refined due to the many objections raised to it within the larger group. While we do not object to research being done to get additional insights, it’s not clear what specifics we will be soliciting, what the timing of that research will be or ultimately what we will do once we receive that research. There was discussion about further defining the “organization name” field and we believe that should continue to be developed and discussed amongst the group. We also continue to be concerned about the applicability of this distinction to currently registered domain names and the feasibility of how this would be implemented by registrars. Action Item #3 (geographic basis) – we agree with the comments added into the working draft by Kristina and strongly support the comment on the last paragraph of the document by either being deleted or to insert Kristina’s text as noted. Best regards, RrSG ePDP representatives From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 25, 2018 at 7:52 AM To: EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Please review - action items and outstanding items Dear All, Please note an updated link for action item #3 as on the original link the redlines were not visible. Do also note that this version now includes the additional changes that Kristina referred to during the meeting. See https://drive.google.com/a/icann.org/file/d/1tamJeyaq4nC8HHQelSeln_BB8fnVlz9... [drive.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_a_ican...>. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 25, 2018 at 1:29 PM To: EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] Please review - action items and outstanding items Dear EPDP Team, Following this week’s EPDP Team meetings, please find below and attached the outstanding action items and related deadlines, outstanding charter questions (not yet discussed) and punch list of items in relation to the data elements workbooks. Please take note that Staff’s provision of an updated and comprehensive data matrix and updated Initial Report draft is dependent on timely delivery of input on the below items. If you believe anything is missing from the list below, please let us know. Thank you for all your support - safe travels home! Caitlin, Berry and Marika =================== EPDP Team Action items ICANN63 Action item #1 – CPH to confirm whether or not purpose A strikethrough language can be removed by Thursday 25 October. (COMPLETED – deletion of strikethrough language confirmed) Action item #2 - Each group (SG/C/AC) to express the group's views and/or proposed edits on small team #1 responses to charter questions and preliminary recommendations with the mailing list by Monday 29 October. (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U6POLQhFNGu1Bo1k0rCluiaVZ27-OKIPpU8K8N1d... [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_documen...>). Action item #3 - Each group (SG/C/AC) to express the group's views and/or proposed edits on the revised responses of the small team #2 charter question responses with the mailing list by Monday 29 October. (see https://drive.google.com/a/icann.org/file/d/1tamJeyaq4nC8HHQelSeln_BB8fnVlz9... [drive.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_a_ican...>). Action item #4 – Each group (SG/C/AC) to review latest versions of data elements workbooks and flag any issues that need to be reviewed prior to publication of Initial Report by Friday 2 November. (see https://community.icann.org/x/5AC8BQ). Action item #5 – Each group (SG/C/AC) to review the responsible parties overview for all purposes and identify which designations need to be further considered by Monday 29 October. (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-rdfchOwpANFVKOtnM_9bPp-zT4JAvTN8dJqebdi... [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_documen...>) Note: Staff’s provision of an updated and comprehensive data matrix and updated Initial Report draft is dependent on timely delivery of the above feedback. Outstanding Charter Questions (not discussed yet or addressed through ongoing work) q) Sun-setting WHOIS Contractual Requirements q1) After migration to RDAP, when can requirements in the Contracts to use WHOIS protocol be eliminated? q2) If EPDP Team’s decision includes a replacement directory access protocol, such as RDAP, when can requirements in the Contracts to use WHOIS protocol be eliminated? b) Collection of registration data by registrar: b3) How shall legitimacy of collecting data be defined (at least for personal data collected from European registrants and others in jurisdictions with data protection law)? k) ICANN's responsibilities in processing data k2) In addition to any specific duties ICANN may have as data controller, what other obligations should be noted by this EPDP Team, including any duties to registrants that are unique and specific to ICANN’s role as the administrator of policies and contracts governing gTLD domain names? l) Registrar's responsibilities in processing data l4) What are the registrar's responsibilities to the data subject with respect to data processing activities that are under ICANN’s control? m) Registry's responsibilities in processing data m4) What are the registry's responsibilities to the data subject based on the above? Outstanding items in data elements workbooks Purpose B Punch List: * Confirm staff-suggested responses for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm data elements (note: Purpose B data elements are dependent on the completion of all other workbooks, as Purpose B only references data already collected) Purpose C Punch List: * Confirm staff-suggested response for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm staff-suggested note re: definition of optional (footnote 2 in workbook) * Confirm data elements Purpose E (Registrar Data Escrow) Punch List: * Confirm Collection Processing Activity (Purpose does not necessarily require collection) * Confirm data elements Purpose F Punch List: * Confirm staff-suggested response for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm data elements Purpose M Punch List: * Determine inclusion/exclusion of RDDRP, PDDRP, and PICDRP RPMs within the purpose statement (adjust PAs if excluded) * Confirm staff-suggested responses for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm Processing Activities structure, especially Disclosure and Retention * Confirm Data Elements Purpose N Punch List: * Determine if Purpose Statement is an ICANN Purpose (note Collection PA indicates ICANN as a Joint Controller) * Confirm Processing Activities structure, especially Disclosure and Retention * Confirm Data Element (Other Data) Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>.