February 2014 - Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

Proposed Agenda - PPSAI WG Meeting
by Marika Konings Feb. 11, 2014

Feb. 11, 2014

Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next PPSAI WG Meeting (Tuesday 11 February 2014) as well as the latest version of the grouping of charter questions as well as work plan document. Please note the clarification that has been added in footnote 1 in relation to de-accreditation. With best regards, Marika Proposed Agenda PPSAI WG Meeting 11 February 2014 at 15.00 UTC 1. Roll Call/SOI 2. Updates Confirm grouping of Charter questions & initial Work Plan 3. Discuss format, objectives and desired outcomes of Singapore F2F meeting? 4. Confirm next steps / next meeting

4 3

Charter question groupings
by Kathy Kleiman Feb. 11, 2014

Feb. 11, 2014

Hi All, Tomorrow we will be talking about the charter question groupings. In looking at "Main Issues," one question jumps out as isolated - question 3 about contractual obligations and termination of customer access to p/p services. This seems to be a penalty clause for registrants far different than the other "big picture" Main Issues we are addressing. It seems a little premature to hit this one so early. I would recommend moving it to the end of the Reveal. It's not a perfect fit, but implicitly we are asking what by a Registrant would justify "revealing" their contact data, and now additionally, what acts would requiring terminating their p/p service? So I recommend moving #3 to a new #9 at the end of the Reveal Section, VI This small, but important, edit attached. I think it will save us lots of time, and help us proceed in a more logical order. Alas, due to a school meeting, I will not be able to join you on the call tomorrow. Best and tx, Kathy ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *_I. _**_MAIN_**_ISSUES_* 1.What, if any, are the types of Standard Service Practices that should be adopted and published by ICANN-accredited privacy/proxy service providers? 2.Should ICANN distinguish between privacy and proxy services for the purpose of the accreditation process? 3.What are the contractual obligations, if any, that if unfulfilled would justify termination of customer access by ICANN-accredited privacy/proxy service providers? 4.What are the effects of the privacy and proxy service specification contained in the 2013 RAA? Have these new requirements improved WHOIS quality, registrant contactability and service usability?[1] <#_ftn1> 5.What should be the contractual obligations of ICANN accredited registrars with regard to accredited privacy/proxy service providers? Should registrars be permitted to knowingly accept registrations where the registrant is using unaccredited service providers that are bound to the same standards as accredited service providers? /a)//What are obligations of a registrar when it finds out that a registrant is operating as an unaccredited service provider after registration has already been processed? / ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [1] <#_ftnref1>Discussion of this question should occur later in the WG deliberative process, given that the 2013 RAA only went into effect on 1 January 2014.

1 0

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Feb. 8, 2014

Feb. 8, 2014

Having discussed this in depth with Carlton over the last year .. .. To paraphrase him : Basically if you want to provide P/P services you need to play by the rules, whatever they may be and be accountable. -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Domains http://www.blacknight.co/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://www.technology.ie Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:49 AM To: Tim Ruiz Cc: Wendy Seltzer; Michele Neylon - Blacknight; Volker Greimann; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan The idea is to conserve the general terms and conditions of the RAA. So we'd consider P/P provisioning in context as not mainstream but an extraordinary event. For old-style developers, what might be termed an exit process, a loop from the main process generated by virtue of the RAA. Once the provider is certified to deliver the service, all impacts that undermine the RAA is theirs to own. So, his fault, his customer's fault, the other fellow's fault, no matter what, the provider is accountable. He will make the business decisions he needs to protect his interests. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Tim Ruiz <tim(a)godaddy.com<mailto:tim@godaddy.com>> wrote: Hi Carlton, Could you explain "so long as the provider accepted strict liability for all actions" in more detail? Thanks, Tim On Feb 6, 2014, at 7:13 PM, "Carlton Samuels" <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>> wrote: FWIW, the ALAC's position makes the response of the P/P provider a business decision. The concept is once the provider was accredited, i.e. a trusted relationship was established, the process is encased in a black box, so long as the provider accepted strict liability for all actions; the risks are theirs to identify and manage. We cared about what went in....and what came out only by impact. This was the principal reason it never mattered to some of us whether the P/P customer was a legal or natural person; same process, same rules. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799<tel:876-818-1799> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Wendy Seltzer <wendy(a)seltzer.com<mailto:wendy@seltzer.com>> wrote: It sounds as though we're in agreement -- it should be possible to offer "takedown" as an alternative to reveal or relay, not required. --Wendy On 02/05/2014 10:37 AM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote: > Volker - yeah. Big difference > If we want to offer something that's our choice > Being obliged to do it is a totally different matter > > M > > -- > Mr Michele Neylon > Blacknight Solutions > Hosting & Colocation, Domains > http://www.blacknight.co/ > http://blog.blacknight.com/ > http://www.technology.ie > Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072<tel:%2B353%20%280%29%2059%20%209183072> > Locall: 1850 929 929 > Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090<tel:%2B353%20%280%2959%209183090> > Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763<tel:%2B353%20%280%29%201%204811%20763> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon > ------------------------------- > Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty > Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net>] > Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 3:26 PM > To: Wendy Seltzer; Michele Neylon - Blacknight; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; Tim Ruiz; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan > > Hi Wendy, > > I hope we will not have to go into another waiver process to allow providers to comply with local law or worse, local liability risks. See how well that is working out for registrars with the data retention spec... > > I think allowing a provider to offer such a service is fine, but requiring such a service is not... > > Volker > > > > >>> Volker >>> >>> Yeah - that's something I was very conscious of when we discussed >>> this in the EWG Simply pulling the service might not be enough to protect you as a provider .. and forcing all providers into that kind of situation seemed unreasonable . . >> That's not universally true in the law. I'd argue that under US law, >> there's no liability on a provider of domain registry services who >> does not encourage or knowingly contribute to unlawful activity. [long >> discussion of secondary liability elsewhere, including in past >> discussions of the legal absurdity of 3.7.7.3 ] >> >> So providers should be permitted to take that view. >> >> --Wendy >> >>> M >>> -- >>> Mr Michele Neylon >>> Blacknight Solutions >>> Hosting & Colocation, Domains >>> http://www.blacknight.co/ >>> http://blog.blacknight.com/ >>> http://www.technology.ie >>> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072<tel:%2B353%20%280%29%2059%20%209183072> >>> Locall: 1850 929 929 >>> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090<tel:%2B353%20%280%2959%209183090> >>> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763<tel:%2B353%20%280%29%201%204811%20763> >>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon >>> ------------------------------- >>> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business >>> Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> >>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Volker >>> Greimann >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 1:49 PM >>> To: Wendy Seltzer; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; Tim Ruiz; >>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>> >>> While I understand this concern from a privacy standpoint, as a service provider this is problematic as one needs to be able to point to the responsible party in case of legal violations in order to avoid culpability and liability. >>> >>> Volker >>> >>>>> Dear Wendy, Tim, Volker and Group, >>>>> >>>>> As regards the last paragraph on Wendy´s message... >>>>> >>>>> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >>>>> >>>>> I have deep concerns with offering such a service. If the P&P service receives a request to reveal the identity and contact data of the registrant, I doubt it can refuse to relay them on account of the de-registration of the domain name (which should be done through the registrar). If the request comes from an individual or organization holding a legitimate interest, there may be situations in which they would still be entitled to get those data (I´m thinking of a prospective file suit or extrajudicial request for redress). But, let us discuss thoroughly at the appropriate time in the Work Plan. >>>> I believe it should be legitimate to offer a service that has no >>>> possibility of identifying the registrant. Instead, it has other >>>> accountability, namely that the domain name stops resolving upon >>>> receipt of a legitimate complaint. That's the tradeoff I propose, >>>> that there be some situations in which it is by design impossible to >>>> get the identification of the registrant, but it's also impossible >>>> to keep the name in the face of a complaint. >>>> >>>> --Wendy >>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Gema >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>>> De: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> >>>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] En nombre de Tim Ruiz >>>>> Enviado el: martes, 04 de febrero de 2014 16:58 >>>>> Para: Wendy Seltzer; Volker Greimann; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>> Asunto: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>> >>>>> Wendy, I believe Kathy made sure that was captured in our call today. >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: >>>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounce<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounce> >>>>> s@ >>>>> icann.org<http://icann.org>> >>>>> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounc<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounc> >>>>> es @icann.org<http://icann.org>>> on behalf of Wendy Seltzer >>>>> <wendy(a)seltzer.com<mailto:wendy@seltzer.com><mailto:wendy@seltzer.com<mailto:wendy@seltzer.com>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 10:47 AM >>>>> To: Volker Greimann; >>>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>> >>>>> On 01/30/2014 09:13 AM, Volker Greimann wrote: >>>>>> Hi Gema, >>>>>> >>>>>> One note to Main issue 3 as it is proposed: This assumes that the >>>>>> provider has that kind of access or ability. In many cases, the >>>>>> privacy service just allows for the provision of its data and acts >>>>>> as a forwarding service. In the case of the provider affiliated >>>>>> with us, the provider has one ability only: Request the removal of >>>>>> its data from the whois. Other privacy services may have even less >>>>>> influence over the >>>>>> registration- >>>>>> >>>>>> So requiring a takedown or disabling/terminating the registrants' >>>>>> access may not be something that a privacy or proxy service >>>>>> provider is set up to do, depending on how he is integrated with >>>>>> the registrar/reseller/registrant. >>>>>> In the past we have always talked about relay and reveal. These >>>>>> are the main opptions every provider should have in my opinion. >>>>>> Anything beyond that may not be feasible and may not even be in the remit of the provider. >>>>> If we're considering what should be required of services under a new proposed accreditation regime, then we should be prepared to think of what the system should have, not just what it can currently accommodate. >>>>> >>>>> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >>>>> >>>>> --Wendy >>>>> >>>>>> Volker >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 30.01.2014 13:09, schrieb Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria: >>>>>>> Dear Group, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have worked on the PPSAI Charter Questions Grouping and here >>>>>>> you have the result. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gema Campillos >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Deputy Director of Information Society Services >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Secretary of State for Telecommunications and Information Society >>>>>>> >>>>>>> SPAIN >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *De:*gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> >>>>>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *En nombre de *Mary >>>>>>> Wong *Enviado el:* miércoles, 29 de enero de 2014 16:57 >>>>>>> *Para:* >>>>>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>>>> *Asunto:* Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Don, Jim and everyone, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One of the various items for consideration in developing the WG's >>>>>>> Work Plan will involve the planned timing of deliverables >>>>>>> relating to each category of questions (however many there >>>>>>> ultimately are or whether each category is tackled by a different >>>>>>> sub-team). The WG may wish to consider, for example, whether >>>>>>> certain questions/categories need to be addressed before others. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hopefully our next iteration of the Mind Map and proposed >>>>>>> timeline/work plan will assist the WG in discussing Jim's >>>>>>> suggestions, which reflects the methodology used in a couple of >>>>>>> other WGs (and it is good to know that your team felt the >>>>>>> IGO-INGO WG experience was productive and helpful, Jim!). The >>>>>>> work plan is likely change over time depending on the nature and >>>>>>> outcome of the WG (or >>>>>>> sub-team) discussions, and as Jim notes certain categories (e.g. >>>>>>> Main >>>>>>> Issues) may be more organic than others. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Should the WG decide to proceed via sub-teams, another thing to >>>>>>> consider would be ensuring that the work is spread evenly across >>>>>>> the WG rather than have a small group of people spread across >>>>>>> various sub-teams (especially if the deliverables from those are >>>>>>> due in short order!). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I hope these thoughts are useful. To assist with your review of >>>>>>> Jim's suggestions, I attach an updated version of Jim's document >>>>>>> which adds the threshold question for Section III discussed on >>>>>>> the call yesterday (using Steve's suggested wording) and with a >>>>>>> couple of comments inserted to help provide context to one or two >>>>>>> sub-questions that Kathy had asked about. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks and cheers >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mary >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mary Wong >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Senior Policy Director >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892<tel:%2B1%20603%20574%204892> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org><mailto:mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> >>>>>>> <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * One World. One Internet. * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org<mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org> >>>>>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org<mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>>> >>>>>>> *Date: *Wednesday, January 29, 2014 9:45 AM >>>>>>> *To: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >>>>>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com><mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>%20<mailto:jbik<mailto:jbik> >>>>>>> of f(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:f@sgbdc.com>>>>, "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>>" >>>>>>> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann>. >>>>>>> org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>>> >>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jim, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks very much for all the work you put in on this. I am very >>>>>>> anxious to see the group's thoughts on it. I will reserve mine for >>>>>>> now except to note that reviewing seven reports each week is >>>>>>> inducing cold sweats already. :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I will note up front though that apart from process >>>>>>> considerations, staff support availability will have to be part of >>>>>>> our work plan decisions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Don >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com><mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>%20<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>>>> >>>>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, January 28, 2014 at 6:04 PM >>>>>>> *To: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org<mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org> >>>>>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org<mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>>>, PPSAI <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>> >>>>>>> *Subject: *PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Don, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As you indicated, a Work Plan should help guide our Group's >>>>>>> efforts over the upcoming weeks. We have some suggestions, based >>>>>>> on our positive experience in the IGO/INGO PDP Working Group. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please give us the benefit of your thoughts on the following >>>>>>> suggested Work Plan: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Summarize and compile Working Group survey >>>>>>> responses --possibly in an Excel file, circulated among Group >>>>>>> members. This should be a task for ICANN Staff. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2.Based on Working Group survey responses, clarify the terminology >>>>>>> and issues in each Group of the Charter questions. Identify >>>>>>> consensus or near-consensus responses and hold Consensus Call on >>>>>>> these issues. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3.Create Working Group sub-teams to work on issues by group: (a) >>>>>>> Registration; (b) Maintenance; (c) Contact; (d) Relay; (e) Reveal; >>>>>>> (f) Publication; (g) Termination. Note that the current groupings >>>>>>> of questions do not include "Publication" or "Termination" >>>>>>> categories. We propose adding these categories, which would >>>>>>> include questions taken out of other current categories, as >>>>>>> identified in the attached redline draft. Note also that the >>>>>>> remaining questions in the Main Issues group, an overarching >>>>>>> category, would be addressed organically as a result of this >>>>>>> proposed process. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> a) Each sub-team produces a report, which is delivered to Don by >>>>>>> each Friday or Saturday at the latest, so it can be combined by >>>>>>> staff with the other sub-team reports and discussed at the >>>>>>> upcoming Tuesday Working Group teleconference. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> b) When the responses to the survey come in from the other >>>>>>> constituencies, ICANN staff summarizes the responses for the >>>>>>> Working Group. Each sub-team then analyzes the constituencies' and >>>>>>> Working Group's responses (including majority and minority >>>>>>> views) in its area, and delivers the result to Don by Friday or >>>>>>> Saturday, so ICANN staff can combine it all in one document, such >>>>>>> as an Excel file, for full Working Group review. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 4. Working Group holds Consensus Call and revises final Excel file >>>>>>> of responses to survey accordingly. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 5.Draft report presenting (1) Consensus Proposals (if any); (2) >>>>>>> Non-Consensus Proposals w/ Levels of Support; (3) Minority Views >>>>>>> w/Levels of Support. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 6. Present Report for Public Comment. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This process will provide a means to circle back to the remaining >>>>>>> Main Issues questions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>> >>>>>>> James L. Bikoff >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1101 30th Street, NW >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Suite 120 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Washington, DC 20007 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tel: 202-944-3303<tel:202-944-3303> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fax: 202-944-3306<tel:202-944-3306> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com><mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>> >>>>>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org><mailto:wendy@seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org>> +1 >>>>> 617.863.0613<tel:617.863.0613> Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >>>>> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University >>>>> Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project >>>>> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ https://www.chillingeffects.org/ >>>>> https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>> >>>>> >>> -- >>> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. >>> >>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >>> >>> Volker A. Greimann >>> - Rechtsabteilung - >>> >>> Key-Systems GmbH >>> Im Oberen Werk 1 >>> 66386 St. Ingbert >>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901> >>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851> >>> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> >>> >>> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> >>> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> >>> >>> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: >>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> >>> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> >>> >>> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin >>> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: >>> DE211006534 >>> >>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >>> www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> >>> >>> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. >>> >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Volker A. Greimann >>> - legal department - >>> >>> Key-Systems GmbH >>> Im Oberen Werk 1 >>> 66386 St. Ingbert >>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901> >>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851> >>> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> >>> >>> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> >>> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> >>> >>> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: >>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> >>> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> >>> >>> CEO: Alexander Siffrin >>> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 >>> >>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >>> www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> >>> >>> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>> >> > > -- > Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen, > > Volker A. Greimann > - Rechtsabteilung - > > Key-Systems GmbH > Im Oberen Werk 1 > 66386 St. Ingbert > Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901> > Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851> > Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> > > Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> > > Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: > www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> > www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> > > Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin > Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 > > Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP > www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> > > Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. > > -------------------------------------------- > > Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. > > Best regards, > > Volker A. Greimann > - legal department - > > Key-Systems GmbH > Im Oberen Werk 1 > 66386 St. Ingbert > Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901> > Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851<tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851> > Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> > > Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> > > Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: > www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> > www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> > > CEO: Alexander Siffrin > Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 > > Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP > www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> > > This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. > > > -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org> +1 617.863.0613<tel:%2B1%20617.863.0613> Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project http://wendy.seltzer.org/ https://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

1 0

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Feb. 8, 2014

Feb. 8, 2014

Volker - yeah. Big difference If we want to offer something that's our choice Being obliged to do it is a totally different matter M -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Domains http://www.blacknight.co/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://www.technology.ie Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 -----Original Message----- From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 3:26 PM To: Wendy Seltzer; Michele Neylon - Blacknight; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; Tim Ruiz; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan Hi Wendy, I hope we will not have to go into another waiver process to allow providers to comply with local law or worse, local liability risks. See how well that is working out for registrars with the data retention spec... I think allowing a provider to offer such a service is fine, but requiring such a service is not... Volker >> Volker >> >> Yeah - that's something I was very conscious of when we discussed >> this in the EWG Simply pulling the service might not be enough to protect you as a provider .. and forcing all providers into that kind of situation seemed unreasonable . . > That's not universally true in the law. I'd argue that under US law, > there's no liability on a provider of domain registry services who > does not encourage or knowingly contribute to unlawful activity. [long > discussion of secondary liability elsewhere, including in past > discussions of the legal absurdity of 3.7.7.3 ] > > So providers should be permitted to take that view. > > --Wendy > >> M >> -- >> Mr Michele Neylon >> Blacknight Solutions >> Hosting & Colocation, Domains >> http://www.blacknight.co/ >> http://blog.blacknight.com/ >> http://www.technology.ie >> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 >> Locall: 1850 929 929 >> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 >> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon >> ------------------------------- >> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business >> Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org >> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker >> Greimann >> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 1:49 PM >> To: Wendy Seltzer; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; Tim Ruiz; >> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >> >> While I understand this concern from a privacy standpoint, as a service provider this is problematic as one needs to be able to point to the responsible party in case of legal violations in order to avoid culpability and liability. >> >> Volker >> >>>> Dear Wendy, Tim, Volker and Group, >>>> >>>> As regards the last paragraph on Wendy´s message... >>>> >>>> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >>>> >>>> I have deep concerns with offering such a service. If the P&P service receives a request to reveal the identity and contact data of the registrant, I doubt it can refuse to relay them on account of the de-registration of the domain name (which should be done through the registrar). If the request comes from an individual or organization holding a legitimate interest, there may be situations in which they would still be entitled to get those data (I´m thinking of a prospective file suit or extrajudicial request for redress). But, let us discuss thoroughly at the appropriate time in the Work Plan. >>> I believe it should be legitimate to offer a service that has no >>> possibility of identifying the registrant. Instead, it has other >>> accountability, namely that the domain name stops resolving upon >>> receipt of a legitimate complaint. That's the tradeoff I propose, >>> that there be some situations in which it is by design impossible to >>> get the identification of the registrant, but it's also impossible >>> to keep the name in the face of a complaint. >>> >>> --Wendy >>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Gema >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>> De: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org >>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] En nombre de Tim Ruiz >>>> Enviado el: martes, 04 de febrero de 2014 16:58 >>>> Para: Wendy Seltzer; Volker Greimann; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>> Asunto: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>> >>>> Wendy, I believe Kathy made sure that was captured in our call today. >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: >>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounce >>>> s@ >>>> icann.org> >>>> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounc >>>> es @icann.org>> on behalf of Wendy Seltzer >>>> <wendy(a)seltzer.com<mailto:wendy@seltzer.com>> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 10:47 AM >>>> To: Volker Greimann; >>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>> >>>> On 01/30/2014 09:13 AM, Volker Greimann wrote: >>>>> Hi Gema, >>>>> >>>>> One note to Main issue 3 as it is proposed: This assumes that the >>>>> provider has that kind of access or ability. In many cases, the >>>>> privacy service just allows for the provision of its data and acts >>>>> as a forwarding service. In the case of the provider affiliated >>>>> with us, the provider has one ability only: Request the removal of >>>>> its data from the whois. Other privacy services may have even less >>>>> influence over the >>>>> registration- >>>>> >>>>> So requiring a takedown or disabling/terminating the registrants' >>>>> access may not be something that a privacy or proxy service >>>>> provider is set up to do, depending on how he is integrated with >>>>> the registrar/reseller/registrant. >>>>> In the past we have always talked about relay and reveal. These >>>>> are the main opptions every provider should have in my opinion. >>>>> Anything beyond that may not be feasible and may not even be in the remit of the provider. >>>> If we're considering what should be required of services under a new proposed accreditation regime, then we should be prepared to think of what the system should have, not just what it can currently accommodate. >>>> >>>> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >>>> >>>> --Wendy >>>> >>>>> Volker >>>>> >>>>> Am 30.01.2014 13:09, schrieb Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria: >>>>>> Dear Group, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have worked on the PPSAI Charter Questions Grouping and here >>>>>> you have the result. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Gema Campillos >>>>>> >>>>>> Deputy Director of Information Society Services >>>>>> >>>>>> Secretary of State for Telecommunications and Information Society >>>>>> >>>>>> SPAIN >>>>>> >>>>>> *De:*gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org >>>>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] *En nombre de *Mary >>>>>> Wong *Enviado el:* miércoles, 29 de enero de 2014 16:57 >>>>>> *Para:* >>>>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>> *Asunto:* Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear Don, Jim and everyone, >>>>>> >>>>>> One of the various items for consideration in developing the WG's >>>>>> Work Plan will involve the planned timing of deliverables >>>>>> relating to each category of questions (however many there >>>>>> ultimately are or whether each category is tackled by a different >>>>>> sub-team). The WG may wish to consider, for example, whether >>>>>> certain questions/categories need to be addressed before others. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hopefully our next iteration of the Mind Map and proposed >>>>>> timeline/work plan will assist the WG in discussing Jim's >>>>>> suggestions, which reflects the methodology used in a couple of >>>>>> other WGs (and it is good to know that your team felt the >>>>>> IGO-INGO WG experience was productive and helpful, Jim!). The >>>>>> work plan is likely change over time depending on the nature and >>>>>> outcome of the WG (or >>>>>> sub-team) discussions, and as Jim notes certain categories (e.g. >>>>>> Main >>>>>> Issues) may be more organic than others. >>>>>> >>>>>> Should the WG decide to proceed via sub-teams, another thing to >>>>>> consider would be ensuring that the work is spread evenly across >>>>>> the WG rather than have a small group of people spread across >>>>>> various sub-teams (especially if the deliverables from those are >>>>>> due in short order!). >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope these thoughts are useful. To assist with your review of >>>>>> Jim's suggestions, I attach an updated version of Jim's document >>>>>> which adds the threshold question for Section III discussed on >>>>>> the call yesterday (using Steve's suggested wording) and with a >>>>>> couple of comments inserted to help provide context to one or two >>>>>> sub-questions that Kathy had asked about. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks and cheers >>>>>> >>>>>> Mary >>>>>> >>>>>> Mary Wong >>>>>> >>>>>> Senior Policy Director >>>>>> >>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) >>>>>> >>>>>> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 >>>>>> >>>>>> Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >>>>>> <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >>>>>> >>>>>> * One World. One Internet. * >>>>>> >>>>>> *From: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >>>>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>> >>>>>> *Date: *Wednesday, January 29, 2014 9:45 AM >>>>>> *To: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com >>>>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbik >>>>>> of f(a)sgbdc.com>>>, "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>" >>>>>> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann. >>>>>> org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>> >>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>> >>>>>> Jim, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks very much for all the work you put in on this. I am very >>>>>> anxious to see the group's thoughts on it. I will reserve mine for >>>>>> now except to note that reviewing seven reports each week is >>>>>> inducing cold sweats already. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> I will note up front though that apart from process >>>>>> considerations, staff support availability will have to be part of >>>>>> our work plan decisions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> Don >>>>>> >>>>>> *From: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>>> >>>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, January 28, 2014 at 6:04 PM >>>>>> *To: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >>>>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>>, PPSAI <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>>> *Subject: *PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear Don, >>>>>> >>>>>> As you indicated, a Work Plan should help guide our Group's >>>>>> efforts over the upcoming weeks. We have some suggestions, based >>>>>> on our positive experience in the IGO/INGO PDP Working Group. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please give us the benefit of your thoughts on the following >>>>>> suggested Work Plan: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Summarize and compile Working Group survey >>>>>> responses --possibly in an Excel file, circulated among Group >>>>>> members. This should be a task for ICANN Staff. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2.Based on Working Group survey responses, clarify the terminology >>>>>> and issues in each Group of the Charter questions. Identify >>>>>> consensus or near-consensus responses and hold Consensus Call on >>>>>> these issues. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3.Create Working Group sub-teams to work on issues by group: (a) >>>>>> Registration; (b) Maintenance; (c) Contact; (d) Relay; (e) Reveal; >>>>>> (f) Publication; (g) Termination. Note that the current groupings >>>>>> of questions do not include "Publication" or "Termination" >>>>>> categories. We propose adding these categories, which would >>>>>> include questions taken out of other current categories, as >>>>>> identified in the attached redline draft. Note also that the >>>>>> remaining questions in the Main Issues group, an overarching >>>>>> category, would be addressed organically as a result of this >>>>>> proposed process. >>>>>> >>>>>> a) Each sub-team produces a report, which is delivered to Don by >>>>>> each Friday or Saturday at the latest, so it can be combined by >>>>>> staff with the other sub-team reports and discussed at the >>>>>> upcoming Tuesday Working Group teleconference. >>>>>> >>>>>> b) When the responses to the survey come in from the other >>>>>> constituencies, ICANN staff summarizes the responses for the >>>>>> Working Group. Each sub-team then analyzes the constituencies' and >>>>>> Working Group's responses (including majority and minority >>>>>> views) in its area, and delivers the result to Don by Friday or >>>>>> Saturday, so ICANN staff can combine it all in one document, such >>>>>> as an Excel file, for full Working Group review. >>>>>> >>>>>> 4. Working Group holds Consensus Call and revises final Excel file >>>>>> of responses to survey accordingly. >>>>>> >>>>>> 5.Draft report presenting (1) Consensus Proposals (if any); (2) >>>>>> Non-Consensus Proposals w/ Levels of Support; (3) Minority Views >>>>>> w/Levels of Support. >>>>>> >>>>>> 6. Present Report for Public Comment. >>>>>> >>>>>> This process will provide a means to circle back to the remaining >>>>>> Main Issues questions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Jim >>>>>> >>>>>> James L. Bikoff >>>>>> >>>>>> Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP >>>>>> >>>>>> 1101 30th Street, NW >>>>>> >>>>>> Suite 120 >>>>>> >>>>>> Washington, DC 20007 >>>>>> >>>>>> Tel: 202-944-3303 >>>>>> >>>>>> Fax: 202-944-3306 >>>>>> >>>>>> jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >>>>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org> +1 >>>> 617.863.0613 Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >>>> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University >>>> Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project >>>> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ https://www.chillingeffects.org/ >>>> https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>> >>>> >> -- >> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. >> >> Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >> >> Volker A. Greimann >> - Rechtsabteilung - >> >> Key-Systems GmbH >> Im Oberen Werk 1 >> 66386 St. Ingbert >> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >> >> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com >> / www.BrandShelter.com >> >> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: >> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >> www.twitter.com/key_systems >> >> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin >> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: >> DE211006534 >> >> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >> www.keydrive.lu >> >> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. >> >> -------------------------------------------- >> >> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Volker A. Greimann >> - legal department - >> >> Key-Systems GmbH >> Im Oberen Werk 1 >> 66386 St. Ingbert >> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >> >> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com >> / www.BrandShelter.com >> >> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: >> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >> www.twitter.com/key_systems >> >> CEO: Alexander Siffrin >> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 >> >> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >> www.keydrive.lu >> >> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> > -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

4 4

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Feb. 7, 2014

Feb. 7, 2014

Volker Yeah - that's something I was very conscious of when we discussed this in the EWG Simply pulling the service might not be enough to protect you as a provider .. and forcing all providers into that kind of situation seemed unreasonable . . M -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Domains http://www.blacknight.co/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://www.technology.ie Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 -----Original Message----- From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 1:49 PM To: Wendy Seltzer; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; Tim Ruiz; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan While I understand this concern from a privacy standpoint, as a service provider this is problematic as one needs to be able to point to the responsible party in case of legal violations in order to avoid culpability and liability. Volker >> Dear Wendy, Tim, Volker and Group, >> >> As regards the last paragraph on Wendy´s message... >> >> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >> >> I have deep concerns with offering such a service. If the P&P service receives a request to reveal the identity and contact data of the registrant, I doubt it can refuse to relay them on account of the de-registration of the domain name (which should be done through the registrar). If the request comes from an individual or organization holding a legitimate interest, there may be situations in which they would still be entitled to get those data (I´m thinking of a prospective file suit or extrajudicial request for redress). But, let us discuss thoroughly at the appropriate time in the Work Plan. > I believe it should be legitimate to offer a service that has no > possibility of identifying the registrant. Instead, it has other > accountability, namely that the domain name stops resolving upon > receipt of a legitimate complaint. That's the tradeoff I propose, that > there be some situations in which it is by design impossible to get > the identification of the registrant, but it's also impossible to keep > the name in the face of a complaint. > > --Wendy > >> Regards, >> >> Gema >> >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org >> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] En nombre de Tim Ruiz >> Enviado el: martes, 04 de febrero de 2014 16:58 >> Para: Wendy Seltzer; Volker Greimann; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> Asunto: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >> >> Wendy, I believe Kathy made sure that was captured in our call today. >> ________________________________________ >> From: >> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@ >> icann.org> >> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces >> @icann.org>> on behalf of Wendy Seltzer >> <wendy(a)seltzer.com<mailto:wendy@seltzer.com>> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 10:47 AM >> To: Volker Greimann; >> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >> >> On 01/30/2014 09:13 AM, Volker Greimann wrote: >>> Hi Gema, >>> >>> One note to Main issue 3 as it is proposed: This assumes that the >>> provider has that kind of access or ability. In many cases, the >>> privacy service just allows for the provision of its data and acts >>> as a forwarding service. In the case of the provider affiliated with >>> us, the provider has one ability only: Request the removal of its >>> data from the whois. Other privacy services may have even less >>> influence over the >>> registration- >>> >>> So requiring a takedown or disabling/terminating the registrants' >>> access may not be something that a privacy or proxy service provider >>> is set up to do, depending on how he is integrated with the >>> registrar/reseller/registrant. >>> In the past we have always talked about relay and reveal. These are >>> the main opptions every provider should have in my opinion. Anything >>> beyond that may not be feasible and may not even be in the remit of the provider. >> If we're considering what should be required of services under a new proposed accreditation regime, then we should be prepared to think of what the system should have, not just what it can currently accommodate. >> >> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >> >> --Wendy >> >>> Volker >>> >>> Am 30.01.2014 13:09, schrieb Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria: >>>> Dear Group, >>>> >>>> I have worked on the PPSAI Charter Questions Grouping and here you >>>> have the result. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Gema Campillos >>>> >>>> Deputy Director of Information Society Services >>>> >>>> Secretary of State for Telecommunications and Information Society >>>> >>>> SPAIN >>>> >>>> *De:*gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org >>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] *En nombre de *Mary >>>> Wong *Enviado el:* miércoles, 29 de enero de 2014 16:57 >>>> *Para:* >>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>> *Asunto:* Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>> >>>> Dear Don, Jim and everyone, >>>> >>>> One of the various items for consideration in developing the WG's >>>> Work Plan will involve the planned timing of deliverables relating >>>> to each category of questions (however many there ultimately are or >>>> whether each category is tackled by a different sub-team). The WG >>>> may wish to consider, for example, whether certain >>>> questions/categories need to be addressed before others. >>>> >>>> Hopefully our next iteration of the Mind Map and proposed >>>> timeline/work plan will assist the WG in discussing Jim's >>>> suggestions, which reflects the methodology used in a couple of >>>> other WGs (and it is good to know that your team felt the IGO-INGO >>>> WG experience was productive and helpful, Jim!). The work plan is >>>> likely change over time depending on the nature and outcome of the >>>> WG (or >>>> sub-team) discussions, and as Jim notes certain categories (e.g. >>>> Main >>>> Issues) may be more organic than others. >>>> >>>> Should the WG decide to proceed via sub-teams, another thing to >>>> consider would be ensuring that the work is spread evenly across >>>> the WG rather than have a small group of people spread across >>>> various sub-teams (especially if the deliverables from those are >>>> due in short order!). >>>> >>>> I hope these thoughts are useful. To assist with your review of >>>> Jim's suggestions, I attach an updated version of Jim's document >>>> which adds the threshold question for Section III discussed on the >>>> call yesterday (using Steve's suggested wording) and with a couple >>>> of comments inserted to help provide context to one or two >>>> sub-questions that Kathy had asked about. >>>> >>>> Thanks and cheers >>>> >>>> Mary >>>> >>>> Mary Wong >>>> >>>> Senior Policy Director >>>> >>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) >>>> >>>> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 >>>> >>>> Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >>>> <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >>>> >>>> * One World. One Internet. * >>>> >>>> *From: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>> >>>> *Date: *Wednesday, January 29, 2014 9:45 AM >>>> *To: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com >>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbikof >>>> f(a)sgbdc.com>>>, "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>" >>>> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann. >>>> org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>> >>>> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>> >>>> Jim, >>>> >>>> Thanks very much for all the work you put in on this. I am very >>>> anxious to see the group's thoughts on it. I will reserve mine for >>>> now except to note that reviewing seven reports each week is >>>> inducing cold sweats already. :) >>>> >>>> I will note up front though that apart from process >>>> considerations, staff support availability will have to be part of >>>> our work plan decisions. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Don >>>> >>>> *From: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>>> >>>> *Date: *Tuesday, January 28, 2014 at 6:04 PM >>>> *To: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>>, PPSAI <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>> *Subject: *PPSAI Work Plan >>>> >>>> Dear Don, >>>> >>>> As you indicated, a Work Plan should help guide our Group's >>>> efforts over the upcoming weeks. We have some suggestions, based >>>> on our positive experience in the IGO/INGO PDP Working Group. >>>> >>>> Please give us the benefit of your thoughts on the following >>>> suggested Work Plan: >>>> >>>> 1. Summarize and compile Working Group survey >>>> responses --possibly in an Excel file, circulated among Group >>>> members. This should be a task for ICANN Staff. >>>> >>>> 2.Based on Working Group survey responses, clarify the terminology >>>> and issues in each Group of the Charter questions. Identify >>>> consensus or near-consensus responses and hold Consensus Call on >>>> these issues. >>>> >>>> 3.Create Working Group sub-teams to work on issues by group: (a) >>>> Registration; (b) Maintenance; (c) Contact; (d) Relay; (e) Reveal; >>>> (f) Publication; (g) Termination. Note that the current groupings >>>> of questions do not include "Publication" or "Termination" >>>> categories. We propose adding these categories, which would >>>> include questions taken out of other current categories, as >>>> identified in the attached redline draft. Note also that the >>>> remaining questions in the Main Issues group, an overarching >>>> category, would be addressed organically as a result of this >>>> proposed process. >>>> >>>> a) Each sub-team produces a report, which is delivered to Don by >>>> each Friday or Saturday at the latest, so it can be combined by >>>> staff with the other sub-team reports and discussed at the >>>> upcoming Tuesday Working Group teleconference. >>>> >>>> b) When the responses to the survey come in from the other >>>> constituencies, ICANN staff summarizes the responses for the >>>> Working Group. Each sub-team then analyzes the constituencies' and >>>> Working Group's responses (including majority and minority >>>> views) in its area, and delivers the result to Don by Friday or >>>> Saturday, so ICANN staff can combine it all in one document, such >>>> as an Excel file, for full Working Group review. >>>> >>>> 4. Working Group holds Consensus Call and revises final Excel file >>>> of responses to survey accordingly. >>>> >>>> 5.Draft report presenting (1) Consensus Proposals (if any); (2) >>>> Non-Consensus Proposals w/ Levels of Support; (3) Minority Views >>>> w/Levels of Support. >>>> >>>> 6. Present Report for Public Comment. >>>> >>>> This process will provide a means to circle back to the remaining >>>> Main Issues questions. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jim >>>> >>>> James L. Bikoff >>>> >>>> Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP >>>> >>>> 1101 30th Street, NW >>>> >>>> Suite 120 >>>> >>>> Washington, DC 20007 >>>> >>>> Tel: 202-944-3303 >>>> >>>> Fax: 202-944-3306 >>>> >>>> jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>> >> >> -- >> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org> +1 >> 617.863.0613 Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Fellow, >> Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University Visiting >> Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project >> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ https://www.chillingeffects.org/ >> https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> > -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

11 19

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Feb. 7, 2014

Feb. 7, 2014

Bob We could go round in circles on this and it wouldn't be particularly productive. I'd prefer that we found areas of common interest and worked from there. Hyperbole doesn't help Proxy / Privacy services need to exist and are going to exist. Having a degree of accountability with certain standards is what this accreditation program is meant to deal with. It's up to ICANN's staff to then enforce it. >From our side ie. the GNSO, we need to make sure that policy is compatible with operational realities so that any rules that come out of all this are reasonable, proportional and actionable / enforceable. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Domains http://www.blacknight.co/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://www.technology.ie Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

2 1

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Feb. 6, 2014

Feb. 6, 2014

Facts Where are they? Give me clear objective and properly researched facts We don't have the number of privacy / proxy users that GD would have but I do have *some* data aka actual facts Number of UDRPS to date - 1 Number of contacts from LEA - 1 Number of other takedown requests - 0 I could give that as a percentage of the total number of com and net domains using our service, but it wouldn't even map to an understandable fraction of 1% Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Domains http://www.blacknight.co/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://www.technology.ie Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 -----Original Message----- From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2014 3:47 PM To: Bob Bruen; Volker Greimann Cc: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan Bob: Without speaking for other service providers, there are currently ~4 million subscribers to our affiliated privacy service. Just under half of those indicate that they are a corporation or business. We employ a team of full-time employees working continuously to detect and terminate bad actors, and their estimates indicate the rate of abuse on our services is less than 1% of all domains. But even allowing for the hypothetical possibility that, at any given moment, there are bad actors have not yet been exposed, then we could generously allow that the true rate of abuse is double that amount, or 2% of all domains. Unless you have some factual basis for your claim that the legitimate users are in the minority (meaning our service is harboring over 2 million criminals and 1 million criminal organizations), then I recommend you walk back some of that rhetoric. You and your organization are focused on the bad actors operating on the Internet. This is a noble cause, but it has skewed your perspective on the actual scope of criminal/absuive users. Thanks< J. On 2/6/14, 8:28 , "Bob Bruen" <bruen(a)coldrain.net> wrote: > >Hi Volker, > >Agreed, but the distortion cannot be ignored. If we stopped doing >things because of problems, we not drive cars, fly airplanes, or >probably walk down a street. However, we have safety procedures in >place for airplanes, we force people to learn how to drive cars and we >have police departments to enforce public safety. > >Usually in these circumstances, the problems are in the minority, >whereas in the privacy/protection space, it is inverted. > > -bob > >On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Volker Greimann wrote: > >> And yet we should not let the bad apples dictate what services should >>or shouldn't be available for those who have a legitimate need. >>Legitimate need is just that: >>legitimate... >> >> Volker >> >> >> I am in agreement with you. Based on years of practical >>experience, the bad actors far >> outnumber those who have a legitimate need for anonimity. >> >> --bob >> >> On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria wrote: >> >> How far apart we are in this! As a provider offering that >>option (reveal or >> abandon), it will attract political dissidents, >>persecuted religious >> minorities, whistleblowers... but it must be aware that >>it is luring into the >> service many wrongdoers, confidence tricksters, IPR >>pirate sites, illegal >> gambling sites, child abusers, malware distributors and >>the like. I´m not so >> sure it could claim it is not actively contributing to >>unlawful activity. >> But´s that another story. >> >> My point is that the mere possibility of offering that >>option damps the >> ability of public authorities to protect public interests >>and could be >> against the law. If, as most of you believe, the provider >>should only process >> requests coming from a LEA within their jurisdiction, >>requests aimed at >> dissidents, religious leaders ... would be stopped there. >> >> I´ve discovered only yesterday that IP providers and >>hosting services are >> acting sometimes as proxies for the real hosting service. >>So, the business >> thrives and diversifies to the despair of LEAs. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Gema >> >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: Wendy Seltzer [mailto:wendy@seltzer.com] >> Enviado el: miércoles, 05 de febrero de 2014 16:19 >> Para: Michele Neylon - Blacknight; Volker Greimann; >>Campillos Gonzalez, Gema >> Maria; Tim Ruiz; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> Asunto: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >> >> On 02/05/2014 09:40 AM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote: >> Volker >> >> Yeah - that's something I was very conscious of >>when we discussed >> this >> in the EWG Simply pulling the service might not be >>enough to >> protect you as a provider .. and forcing all >>providers into that >> kind of situation seemed unreasonable . . >> >> >> That's not universally true in the law. I'd argue that >>under US law, there's >> no liability on a provider of domain registry services >>who does not encourage >> or knowingly contribute to unlawful activity. [long >>discussion of secondary >> liability elsewhere, including in past discussions of the >>legal absurdity of >> 3.7.7.3 ] >> >> So providers should be permitted to take that view. >> >> --Wendy >> >> M >> -- >> Mr Michele Neylon >> Blacknight Solutions >> Hosting & Colocation, Domains >> http://www.blacknight.co/ >> http://blog.blacknight.com/ >> http://www.technology.ie >> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 >> Locall: 1850 929 929 >> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 >> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon >> ------------------------------- >> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit >>12A,Barrowside Business >> Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland >>Company No.: >> 370845 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org >> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On >>Behalf Of Volker >> Greimann >> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 1:49 PM >> To: Wendy Seltzer; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; >>Tim Ruiz; >> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >> >> While I understand this concern from a privacy >>standpoint, as a >> service provider this is problematic as one needs >>to be able to >> point to the responsible party in case of legal >>violations in >> order to avoid culpability and liability. >> >> Volker >> >> Dear Wendy, Tim, Volker and Group, >> >> As regards the last paragraph on Wendy´s >> message... >> >> I've proposed that registrants be offered >> the choice between potential reveal and >> potential termination of registration >> (that choice could be offered up-front at >> the time of registration, or at the time >> of the identification request). For some >> registrants, such as legitimate >> whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear >> of retaliation is more important than the >> persistence of their domain identifier, >> this choice may be important. I hope >> we're at least leaving the opportunity >> for a compliant service to offer an >> "unidentified de-registration" option, >> even though we don't need to mandate it >> for all. >> >> I have deep concerns with offering such a >> service. If the P&P service receives a >> request to reveal the identity and >> contact data of the registrant, I doubt >> it can refuse to relay them on account of >> the de-registration of the domain name >> (which should be done through the >> registrar). If the request comes from an >> individual or organization holding a >> legitimate interest, there may be >> situations in which they would still be >> entitled to get those data (I´m thinking >> of a prospective file suit or >> extrajudicial request for redress). But, >> let us discuss thoroughly at the >> appropriate time in the Work Plan. >> >> I believe it should be legitimate to offer a >>service >> that has no >> possibility of identifying the registrant. >>Instead, >> it has other >> accountability, namely that the domain name >>stops >> resolving upon >> receipt of a legitimate complaint. That's the >> tradeoff I propose, >> that there be some situations in which it is by >> design impossible to >> get the identification of the registrant, but >>it's >> also impossible to >> keep the name in the face of a complaint. >> >> --Wendy >> >> Regards, >> >> Gema >> >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org >> >>[mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] >> En nombre de Tim Ruiz >> Enviado el: martes, 04 de febrero de 2014 >> 16:58 >> Para: Wendy Seltzer; Volker Greimann; >> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> Asunto: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI >> Work Plan >> >> Wendy, I believe Kathy made sure that was >> captured in our call today. >> ________________________________________ >> From: >> >>gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces >> @ >> icann.org> >> >><gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounce >> s @icann.org>> on behalf of Wendy >>Seltzer >> >><wendy(a)seltzer.com<mailto:wendy@seltzer.com>> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 10:47 AM >> To: Volker Greimann; >> >>gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI >> Work Plan >> >> On 01/30/2014 09:13 AM, Volker Greimann >> wrote: >> Hi Gema, >> >> One note to Main issue 3 as >> it is proposed: This assumes >> that the >> provider has that kind of >> access or ability. In many >> cases, the >> privacy service just allows >> for the provision of its data >> and acts >> as a forwarding service. In >> the case of the provider >> affiliated >> with us, the provider has one >> ability only: Request the >> removal of >> its data from the whois. >> Other privacy services may >> have even less >> influence over the >> registration- >> >> So requiring a takedown or >> disabling/terminating the >> registrants' >> access may not be something >> that a privacy or proxy >> service >> provider is set up to do, >> depending on how he is >> integrated with >> the >> registrar/reseller/registrant. >> In the past we have always >> talked about relay and >> reveal. These are >> the main opptions every >> provider should have in my >> opinion. >> Anything beyond that may not >> be feasible and may not even >> be in the remit of the >> provider. >> >> If we're considering what should be >> required of services under a new proposed >> accreditation regime, then we should be >> prepared to think of what the system >> should have, not just what it can >> currently accommodate. >> >> I've proposed that registrants be offered >> the choice between potential reveal and >> potential termination of registration >> (that choice could be offered up-front at >> the time of registration, or at the time >> of the identification request). For some >> registrants, such as legitimate >> whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear >> of retaliation is more important than the >> persistence of their domain identifier, >> this choice may be important. I hope >> we're at least leaving the opportunity >> for a compliant service to offer an >> "unidentified de-registration" option, >> even though we don't need to mandate it >> for all. >> >> --Wendy >> >> Volker >> >> Am 30.01.2014 13:09, schrieb >> Campillos Gonzalez, Gema >> Maria: >> Dear Group, >> >> I have worked on >> the PPSAI Charter >> Questions >> Grouping and here >> you >> have the result. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Gema Campillos >> >> Deputy Director >> of Information >> Society Services >> >> Secretary of >> State for >> Telecommunications >> and Information >> Society >> >> SPAIN >> >> >>*De:*gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org >> >>[mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] >> *En nombre de >> *Mary >> Wong *Enviado >> el:* miércoles, >> 29 de enero de >> 2014 16:57 >> *Para:* >> >>gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> *Asunto:* Re: >> [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] >> PPSAI Work Plan >> >> Dear Don, Jim and >> everyone, >> >> One of the >> various items for >> consideration in >> developing the >> WG's >> Work Plan will >> involve the >> planned timing of >> deliverables >> relating >> to each category >> of questions >> (however many >> there ultimately >> are >> or whether each >> category is >> tackled by a >> different >> sub-team). The >> WG may wish to >> consider, for >> example, whether >> certain >> questions/categories >> need to be >> addressed before >> others. >> >> Hopefully our >> next iteration of >> the Mind Map and >> proposed >> timeline/work >> plan will assist >> the WG in >> discussing Jim's >> suggestions, >> which reflects >> the methodology >> used in a couple >> of >> other WGs (and it >> is good to know >> that your team >> felt the IGO-INGO >> WG experience was >> productive and >> helpful, Jim!). >> The work plan is >> likely change >> over time >> depending on the >> nature and >> outcome of the >> WG (or >> sub-team) >> discussions, and >> as Jim notes >> certain >> categories (e.g. >> Main >> Issues) may be >> more organic than >> others. >> >> Should the WG >> decide to proceed >> via sub-teams, >> another thing to >> consider would be >> ensuring that the >> work is spread >> evenly across >> the WG rather >> than have a small >> group of people >> spread across >> various sub-teams >> (especially if >> the deliverables >> from those are >> due in short >> order!). >> >> I hope these >> thoughts are >> useful. To assist >> with your review >> of >> Jim's >> suggestions, I >> attach an updated >> version of Jim's >> document >> which adds the >> threshold >> question for >> Section III >> discussed on the >> call yesterday >> (using Steve's >> suggested >> wording) and with >> a couple >> of comments >> inserted to help >> provide context >> to one or two >> sub-questions >> that Kathy had >> asked about. >> >> Thanks and cheers >> >> Mary >> >> Mary Wong >> >> Senior Policy >> Director >> >> Internet >> Corporation for >> Assigned Names & >> Numbers (ICANN) >> >> Telephone: +1 603 >> 574 4892 >> >> Email: >> >>mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >> >><mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >> >> * One World. One >> Internet. * >> >> *From: *Don >> Blumenthal >> <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>> >> *Date: >> *Wednesday, >> January 29, 2014 >> 9:45 AM >> *To: *Jim Bikoff >> <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com >> >><mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbiko >> f f(a)sgbdc.com>>>, >> >>"gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> >><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.or >>g%2 >>0<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@ >> icann.org>>" >> >><gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> >><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann. >> >>org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>> >> *Subject: *Re: >> [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] >> PPSAI Work Plan >> >> Jim, >> >> Thanks very >> much for all the >> work you put in >> on this. I am >> very >> anxious to >> see the group's >> thoughts on it. I >> will reserve mine >> for >> now except >> to note that >> reviewing seven >> reports each week >> is >> inducing >> cold sweats >> already. :) >> >> I will note >> up front though >> that apart from >> process >> >> considerations, >> staff support >> availability will >> have to be part >> of >> our work >> plan decisions. >> >> Best, >> >> Don >> >> *From: *Jim >> Bikoff >> <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com >> >><mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbikoff@s >>gbd >>c.com>>> >> *Date: >> *Tuesday, January >> 28, 2014 at 6:04 >> PM >> *To: *Don >> Blumenthal >> <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >> >> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>>, >> PPSAI >> >> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> >> >><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >> *Subject: >> *PPSAI Work Plan >> >> Dear Don, >> >> As you >> indicated, a Work >> Plan should help >> guide our Group's >> efforts over >> the upcoming >> weeks. We have >> some suggestions, >> based >> on our >> positive >> experience in the >> IGO/INGO PDP >> Working Group. >> >> Please give >> us the benefit of >> your thoughts on >> the following >> suggested >> Work Plan: >> >> 1. Summarize >> and compile >> Working Group >> survey >> responses >> --possibly in an >> Excel file, >> circulated among >> Group >> members. >> This should be a >> task for ICANN >> Staff. >> >> 2.Based on >> Working Group >> survey responses, >> clarify the >> terminology >> and issues >> in each Group of >> the Charter >> questions. >> Identify >> consensus or >> near-consensus >> responses and >> hold Consensus >> Call on >> these >> issues. >> >> 3.Create >> Working Group >> sub-teams to work >> on issues by >> group: (a) >> >> Registration; (b) >> Maintenance; (c) >> Contact; (d) >> Relay; (e) >> Reveal; >> (f) >> Publication; (g) >> Termination. >> Note that the >> current groupings >> of questions >> do not include >> "Publication" or >> "Termination" >> categories. >> We propose adding >> these categories, >> which would >> include >> questions taken >> out of other >> current >> categories, as >> identified >> in the attached >> redline draft. >> Note also that >> the >> remaining >> questions in the >> Main Issues >> group, an >> overarching >> category, >> would be >> addressed >> organically as a >> result of this >> proposed >> process. >> >> a) Each >> sub-team produces >> a report, which >> is delivered to >> Don by >> each Friday >> or Saturday at >> the latest, so it >> can be combined >> by >> staff with >> the other >> sub-team reports >> and discussed at >> the >> upcoming >> Tuesday Working >> Group >> teleconference. >> >> b) When the >> responses to the >> survey come in >> from the other >> >> constituencies, >> ICANN staff >> summarizes the >> responses for the >> Working >> Group. Each >> sub-team then >> analyzes the >> constituencies' >> and >> Working >> Group's responses >> (including >> majority and >> minority >> views) in >> its area, and >> delivers the >> result to Don by >> Friday or >> Saturday, so >> ICANN staff can >> combine it all in >> one document, >> such >> as an Excel >> file, for full >> Working Group >> review. >> >> 4. Working >> Group holds >> Consensus Call >> and revises final >> Excel file >> of responses >> to survey >> accordingly. >> >> 5.Draft >> report presenting >> (1) Consensus >> Proposals (if >> any); (2) >> >> Non-Consensus >> Proposals w/ >> Levels of >> Support; (3) >> Minority Views >> w/Levels of >> Support. >> >> 6. Present >> Report for Public >> Comment. >> >> This process >> will provide a >> means to circle >> back to the >> remaining >> Main Issues >> questions. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jim >> >> James L. >> Bikoff >> >> Silverberg, >> Goldman & Bikoff, >> LLP >> >> 1101 30th >> Street, NW >> >> Suite 120 >> >> Washington, >> DC 20007 >> >> Tel: >> 202-944-3303 >> >> Fax: >> 202-944-3306 >> >> >> >>jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> mailing list >> >>Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing >> list >> >>Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> >> -- >> Wendy Seltzer -- >> >>wendy(a)seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org> >> +1 >> 617.863.0613 Policy Counsel, World Wide >> Web Consortium (W3C) Fellow, >> Berkman Center for Internet & Society at >> Harvard University Visiting >> Fellow, Yale Law School Information >> Society Project >> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ >> https://www.chillingeffects.org/ >> https://www.torproject.org/ >> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> >>Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >>_______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> >>Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >> >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur >>Verfügung. >> >> Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >> >> Volker A. Greimann >> - Rechtsabteilung - >> >> Key-Systems GmbH >> Im Oberen Werk 1 >> 66386 St. Ingbert >> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >> >> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net >> www.domaindiscount24.com / >> www.BrandShelter.com >> >> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser >>Fan bei >> Facebook: >> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >> www.twitter.com/key_systems >> >> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin >> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken >>Umsatzsteuer ID.: >> DE211006534 >> >> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >> www.keydrive.lu >> >> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur >>für den >> angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der >>Kenntnisgabe, >> Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch >>den Empfänger >> ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für >>Sie bestimmt >> sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail >>oder telefonisch >> in Verbindung zu setzen. >> >> -------------------------------------------- >> >> Should you have any further questions, please do >>not hesitate to >> contact us. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Volker A. Greimann >> - legal department - >> >> Key-Systems GmbH >> Im Oberen Werk 1 >> 66386 St. Ingbert >> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >> >> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net >> www.domaindiscount24.com / >> www.BrandShelter.com >> >> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on >>Facebook and >> stay updated: >> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >> www.twitter.com/key_systems >> >> CEO: Alexander Siffrin >> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. >>ID.: >> DE211006534 >> >> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >> www.keydrive.lu >> >> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only >>for the person >> to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not >>permitted to >> publish any content of this email. You must not >>use, disclose, >> copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an >>addressing or >> transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, >>kindly notify the >> author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us >>by telephone. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> >> >> -- >> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613 Policy >>Counsel, World Wide >> Web Consortium (W3C) Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet >>& Society at Harvard >> University Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information >>Society Project >> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ https://www.chillingeffects.org/ >> https://www.torproject.org/ >>http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> >> > >-- >Dr. Robert Bruen >Cold Rain Labs >http://coldrain.net/bruen >+1.802.579.6288 _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

1 0

FW: ICANN News Alert -- WHOIS Privacy Proxy Services Questionnaire (Available Until 28 February 2014)
by Marika Konings Feb. 6, 2014

Feb. 6, 2014

For your information. From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday 6 February 2014 02:24 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Subject: ICANN News Alert -- WHOIS Privacy Proxy Services Questionnaire (Available Until 28 February 2014) ICANN News Alert <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm WHOIS Privacy Proxy Services Questionnaire (Available Until 28 February 2014) 5 February 2014 The Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (EWG) is seeking information from Privacy and Proxy (P/P) Service Providers on existing practices to inform its deliberations as it develops recommendations on best practices for the proposed Next Generation Registration Directory Service (RDS) to replace today's Whois system. The Questionnaire will be used to understand current P/P Provider practices and will be made available until 28 February 2014. Questionnaire attributes: * Questionnaire Availability Date: 31 January 2014 * Questionnaire Address: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/Privacy_and_Proxy_Services_Survey * Questionnaire Close Date: 28 February 2014, 23:59 UTC * Questionnaire Language: English only All questions can be downloaded in PDF form <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/45744698/PP_EWG_Survey.pdf ?version=1&modificationDate=1391125472409&api=v2> [PDF, 281 KB] for offline review, with answers submitted either via email to PP-EWG-Survey(a)icann.org or submitting answers online. The EWG greatly appreciates any insights on this topic from those P/P Providers interested in sharing information about their current practices. The individual responses will be used only to understand current P/P Provider practices and will not be published by the EWG, unless the P/P Provider requests that its individual response be disclosed. The EWG plans to publish a summary of anonymized, aggregated results for ICANN community use in considering future policy recommendations, and will be shared with the GNSO PDP Working Group on Privacy/Proxy Service Accreditation Issues. Background In December 2012, ICANN announced the creation of an Expert Working Group (EWG) on next-generation gTLD Registration Directory Services, as a first step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data. The EWG's findings are expected to serve as a foundation to help the GNSO create a new global policy for the provision of gTLD registration data. A significant milestone was reached on 24 June 2013 <http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-24jun13-en.htm> with the publication <http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-24jun13-en.htm> of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services> (EWG)'s Initial Report and FAQs, opening a consultation period with the ICANN community. The Initial Report <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report -24jun13-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.70 MB] enumerated the users, purposes, data elements, recommended principles and features, and proposed model to guide the development of a next generation Registration Directory Service (RDS) to replace WHOIS. Prior to the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires, the EWG published its Status Update Report <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update- 11nov13-en.pdf> [PDF, 2.26 MB] to highlight the EWG's thinking on these and many other key issues. It also provides a great deal more detail on the analysis that lay behind the Initial Report <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report -24jun13-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.70 MB]. The EWG is currently in its research and information gathering phase. This Questionnaire is one of several research efforts that the EWG is currently undertaking to ensure that its final recommendations are supported by facts and informed by current practices. What's Next? The EWG expects to complete its recommendations in 2014, informed by Community feedback and in-depth analysis of selected areas, including the responses to this Questionnaire. The EWG plans to reconvene in March 2014 to derive fact-based recommendations after carefully examining the results of its research, and expects to deliver its final report to the ICANN Board by June 2014. Questions If questions arise about the Questionnaire or the online tool, please contact Margie Milam at PP-EWG-Survey(a)icann.org. This message was sent to marika.konings(a)icann.org from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=11415898&l=6333&s=KUM2&m=93 0255&c=165637>

1 0

Committee of the Whole vs Subteams
by Don Blumenthal Feb. 5, 2014

Feb. 5, 2014

I’m concerned that my outline of a full WG approach to our work as opposed to subteams was not as clear as I wanted. Some very interesting things were going on in chat and I made the mistake of trying to read and talk at the same time. Please contribute by voice if you can. I think that the interaction is better and I’m not sure that everybody reads the transcript later (sorry, Nathalie). Mary, Marika, Steve, Graeme, and I looked at comments on the list and shared our experiences. The high points: Committee of the Whole Allows everyone to be involved Is particularly appropriate when issues don’t separate cleanly Avoids problems that subteams create when a WG member wants to be on multiple teams or can’t devote the time to subteams and the full WG Subteams Is good for people who have specific interest or expertise and want to focus their efforts Works best when major issues don’t overlap much Can add efficiency in that topics are split out for concurrent analysis instead of the WG tackling them in sequence Add staff burden and the possibility of failure points if subchairs or members don’t follow through We decided to start with a Committee of the Whole approach because we have some overarching issues to address. In addition, as we saw today and on prior calls, dividing topics may not be so easy when we get into section discussions. However, the WG can decide later whether we want to create smaller groups and, if so, how to do it. ICANN WGs have used many different models. Don

3 4

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Feb. 5, 2014

Feb. 5, 2014

Wendy We probably agree :-) M ------------------------ Mr. Michele Neylon Blacknight http://Blacknight.tel Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity > On 5 Feb 2014, at 16:11, "Wendy Seltzer" <wendy(a)seltzer.com> wrote: > > It sounds as though we're in agreement -- it should be possible to offer > "takedown" as an alternative to reveal or relay, not required. > > --Wendy > >> On 02/05/2014 10:37 AM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote: >> Volker - yeah. Big difference >> If we want to offer something that's our choice >> Being obliged to do it is a totally different matter >> >> M >> >> -- >> Mr Michele Neylon >> Blacknight Solutions >> Hosting & Colocation, Domains >> http://www.blacknight.co/ >> http://blog.blacknight.com/ >> http://www.technology.ie >> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 >> Locall: 1850 929 929 >> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 >> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon >> ------------------------------- >> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty >> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net] >> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 3:26 PM >> To: Wendy Seltzer; Michele Neylon - Blacknight; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; Tim Ruiz; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >> >> Hi Wendy, >> >> I hope we will not have to go into another waiver process to allow providers to comply with local law or worse, local liability risks. See how well that is working out for registrars with the data retention spec... >> >> I think allowing a provider to offer such a service is fine, but requiring such a service is not... >> >> Volker >> >> >> >> >>>> Volker >>>> >>>> Yeah - that's something I was very conscious of when we discussed >>>> this in the EWG Simply pulling the service might not be enough to protect you as a provider .. and forcing all providers into that kind of situation seemed unreasonable . . >>> That's not universally true in the law. I'd argue that under US law, >>> there's no liability on a provider of domain registry services who >>> does not encourage or knowingly contribute to unlawful activity. [long >>> discussion of secondary liability elsewhere, including in past >>> discussions of the legal absurdity of 3.7.7.3 ] >>> >>> So providers should be permitted to take that view. >>> >>> --Wendy >>> >>>> M >>>> -- >>>> Mr Michele Neylon >>>> Blacknight Solutions >>>> Hosting & Colocation, Domains >>>> http://www.blacknight.co/ >>>> http://blog.blacknight.com/ >>>> http://www.technology.ie >>>> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 >>>> Locall: 1850 929 929 >>>> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 >>>> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 >>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business >>>> Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org >>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker >>>> Greimann >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 1:49 PM >>>> To: Wendy Seltzer; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria; Tim Ruiz; >>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>> >>>> While I understand this concern from a privacy standpoint, as a service provider this is problematic as one needs to be able to point to the responsible party in case of legal violations in order to avoid culpability and liability. >>>> >>>> Volker >>>> >>>>>> Dear Wendy, Tim, Volker and Group, >>>>>> >>>>>> As regards the last paragraph on Wendy´s message... >>>>>> >>>>>> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have deep concerns with offering such a service. If the P&P service receives a request to reveal the identity and contact data of the registrant, I doubt it can refuse to relay them on account of the de-registration of the domain name (which should be done through the registrar). If the request comes from an individual or organization holding a legitimate interest, there may be situations in which they would still be entitled to get those data (I´m thinking of a prospective file suit or extrajudicial request for redress). But, let us discuss thoroughly at the appropriate time in the Work Plan. >>>>> I believe it should be legitimate to offer a service that has no >>>>> possibility of identifying the registrant. Instead, it has other >>>>> accountability, namely that the domain name stops resolving upon >>>>> receipt of a legitimate complaint. That's the tradeoff I propose, >>>>> that there be some situations in which it is by design impossible to >>>>> get the identification of the registrant, but it's also impossible >>>>> to keep the name in the face of a complaint. >>>>> >>>>> --Wendy >>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Gema >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>>>> De: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org >>>>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] En nombre de Tim Ruiz >>>>>> Enviado el: martes, 04 de febrero de 2014 16:58 >>>>>> Para: Wendy Seltzer; Volker Greimann; gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>>>> Asunto: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>> >>>>>> Wendy, I believe Kathy made sure that was captured in our call today. >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: >>>>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounce >>>>>> s@ >>>>>> icann.org> >>>>>> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounc >>>>>> es @icann.org>> on behalf of Wendy Seltzer >>>>>> <wendy(a)seltzer.com<mailto:wendy@seltzer.com>> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 10:47 AM >>>>>> To: Volker Greimann; >>>>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 01/30/2014 09:13 AM, Volker Greimann wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Gema, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One note to Main issue 3 as it is proposed: This assumes that the >>>>>>> provider has that kind of access or ability. In many cases, the >>>>>>> privacy service just allows for the provision of its data and acts >>>>>>> as a forwarding service. In the case of the provider affiliated >>>>>>> with us, the provider has one ability only: Request the removal of >>>>>>> its data from the whois. Other privacy services may have even less >>>>>>> influence over the >>>>>>> registration- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So requiring a takedown or disabling/terminating the registrants' >>>>>>> access may not be something that a privacy or proxy service >>>>>>> provider is set up to do, depending on how he is integrated with >>>>>>> the registrar/reseller/registrant. >>>>>>> In the past we have always talked about relay and reveal. These >>>>>>> are the main opptions every provider should have in my opinion. >>>>>>> Anything beyond that may not be feasible and may not even be in the remit of the provider. >>>>>> If we're considering what should be required of services under a new proposed accreditation regime, then we should be prepared to think of what the system should have, not just what it can currently accommodate. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've proposed that registrants be offered the choice between potential reveal and potential termination of registration (that choice could be offered up-front at the time of registration, or at the time of the identification request). For some registrants, such as legitimate whistleblowers whose anonymity for fear of retaliation is more important than the persistence of their domain identifier, this choice may be important. I hope we're at least leaving the opportunity for a compliant service to offer an "unidentified de-registration" option, even though we don't need to mandate it for all. >>>>>> >>>>>> --Wendy >>>>>> >>>>>>> Volker >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 30.01.2014 13:09, schrieb Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria: >>>>>>>> Dear Group, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have worked on the PPSAI Charter Questions Grouping and here >>>>>>>> you have the result. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gema Campillos >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Deputy Director of Information Society Services >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Secretary of State for Telecommunications and Information Society >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SPAIN >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *De:*gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org >>>>>>>> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] *En nombre de *Mary >>>>>>>> Wong *Enviado el:* miércoles, 29 de enero de 2014 16:57 >>>>>>>> *Para:* >>>>>>>> gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>>>> *Asunto:* Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear Don, Jim and everyone, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One of the various items for consideration in developing the WG's >>>>>>>> Work Plan will involve the planned timing of deliverables >>>>>>>> relating to each category of questions (however many there >>>>>>>> ultimately are or whether each category is tackled by a different >>>>>>>> sub-team). The WG may wish to consider, for example, whether >>>>>>>> certain questions/categories need to be addressed before others. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hopefully our next iteration of the Mind Map and proposed >>>>>>>> timeline/work plan will assist the WG in discussing Jim's >>>>>>>> suggestions, which reflects the methodology used in a couple of >>>>>>>> other WGs (and it is good to know that your team felt the >>>>>>>> IGO-INGO WG experience was productive and helpful, Jim!). The >>>>>>>> work plan is likely change over time depending on the nature and >>>>>>>> outcome of the WG (or >>>>>>>> sub-team) discussions, and as Jim notes certain categories (e.g. >>>>>>>> Main >>>>>>>> Issues) may be more organic than others. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Should the WG decide to proceed via sub-teams, another thing to >>>>>>>> consider would be ensuring that the work is spread evenly across >>>>>>>> the WG rather than have a small group of people spread across >>>>>>>> various sub-teams (especially if the deliverables from those are >>>>>>>> due in short order!). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I hope these thoughts are useful. To assist with your review of >>>>>>>> Jim's suggestions, I attach an updated version of Jim's document >>>>>>>> which adds the threshold question for Section III discussed on >>>>>>>> the call yesterday (using Steve's suggested wording) and with a >>>>>>>> couple of comments inserted to help provide context to one or two >>>>>>>> sub-questions that Kathy had asked about. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks and cheers >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mary >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mary Wong >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Senior Policy Director >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >>>>>>>> <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * One World. One Internet. * >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *From: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >>>>>>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>> >>>>>>>> *Date: *Wednesday, January 29, 2014 9:45 AM >>>>>>>> *To: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com >>>>>>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbik >>>>>>>> of f(a)sgbdc.com>>>, "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org><mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>" >>>>>>>> <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann. >>>>>>>> org%20<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>>> >>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jim, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks very much for all the work you put in on this. I am very >>>>>>>> anxious to see the group's thoughts on it. I will reserve mine for >>>>>>>> now except to note that reviewing seven reports each week is >>>>>>>> inducing cold sweats already. :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will note up front though that apart from process >>>>>>>> considerations, staff support availability will have to be part of >>>>>>>> our work plan decisions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Don >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *From: *Jim Bikoff <jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com%20<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com>>> >>>>>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, January 28, 2014 at 6:04 PM >>>>>>>> *To: *Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal(a)pir.org >>>>>>>> <mailto:dblumenthal@pir.org>>, PPSAI <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> >>>>>>>> *Subject: *PPSAI Work Plan >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear Don, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As you indicated, a Work Plan should help guide our Group's >>>>>>>> efforts over the upcoming weeks. We have some suggestions, based >>>>>>>> on our positive experience in the IGO/INGO PDP Working Group. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please give us the benefit of your thoughts on the following >>>>>>>> suggested Work Plan: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. Summarize and compile Working Group survey >>>>>>>> responses --possibly in an Excel file, circulated among Group >>>>>>>> members. This should be a task for ICANN Staff. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2.Based on Working Group survey responses, clarify the terminology >>>>>>>> and issues in each Group of the Charter questions. Identify >>>>>>>> consensus or near-consensus responses and hold Consensus Call on >>>>>>>> these issues. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 3.Create Working Group sub-teams to work on issues by group: (a) >>>>>>>> Registration; (b) Maintenance; (c) Contact; (d) Relay; (e) Reveal; >>>>>>>> (f) Publication; (g) Termination. Note that the current groupings >>>>>>>> of questions do not include "Publication" or "Termination" >>>>>>>> categories. We propose adding these categories, which would >>>>>>>> include questions taken out of other current categories, as >>>>>>>> identified in the attached redline draft. Note also that the >>>>>>>> remaining questions in the Main Issues group, an overarching >>>>>>>> category, would be addressed organically as a result of this >>>>>>>> proposed process. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> a) Each sub-team produces a report, which is delivered to Don by >>>>>>>> each Friday or Saturday at the latest, so it can be combined by >>>>>>>> staff with the other sub-team reports and discussed at the >>>>>>>> upcoming Tuesday Working Group teleconference. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> b) When the responses to the survey come in from the other >>>>>>>> constituencies, ICANN staff summarizes the responses for the >>>>>>>> Working Group. Each sub-team then analyzes the constituencies' and >>>>>>>> Working Group's responses (including majority and minority >>>>>>>> views) in its area, and delivers the result to Don by Friday or >>>>>>>> Saturday, so ICANN staff can combine it all in one document, such >>>>>>>> as an Excel file, for full Working Group review. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 4. Working Group holds Consensus Call and revises final Excel file >>>>>>>> of responses to survey accordingly. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 5.Draft report presenting (1) Consensus Proposals (if any); (2) >>>>>>>> Non-Consensus Proposals w/ Levels of Support; (3) Minority Views >>>>>>>> w/Levels of Support. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 6. Present Report for Public Comment. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This process will provide a means to circle back to the remaining >>>>>>>> Main Issues questions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> James L. Bikoff >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1101 30th Street, NW >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Suite 120 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Washington, DC 20007 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tel: 202-944-3303 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Fax: 202-944-3306 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> jbikoff(a)sgbdc.com<mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >>>>>>>> <mailto:jbikoff@sgbdc.com> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org> +1 >>>>>> 617.863.0613 Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >>>>>> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University >>>>>> Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project >>>>>> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ https://www.chillingeffects.org/ >>>>>> https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> >>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >>>> -- >>>> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. >>>> >>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >>>> >>>> Volker A. Greimann >>>> - Rechtsabteilung - >>>> >>>> Key-Systems GmbH >>>> Im Oberen Werk 1 >>>> 66386 St. Ingbert >>>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >>>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >>>> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >>>> >>>> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com >>>> / www.BrandShelter.com >>>> >>>> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: >>>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >>>> www.twitter.com/key_systems >>>> >>>> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin >>>> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: >>>> DE211006534 >>>> >>>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >>>> www.keydrive.lu >>>> >>>> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Volker A. Greimann >>>> - legal department - >>>> >>>> Key-Systems GmbH >>>> Im Oberen Werk 1 >>>> 66386 St. Ingbert >>>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >>>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >>>> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >>>> >>>> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com >>>> / www.BrandShelter.com >>>> >>>> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: >>>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >>>> www.twitter.com/key_systems >>>> >>>> CEO: Alexander Siffrin >>>> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 >>>> >>>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >>>> www.keydrive.lu >>>> >>>> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list >>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org >>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg >> >> -- >> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. >> >> Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >> >> Volker A. Greimann >> - Rechtsabteilung - >> >> Key-Systems GmbH >> Im Oberen Werk 1 >> 66386 St. Ingbert >> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >> >> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com >> >> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: >> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >> www.twitter.com/key_systems >> >> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin >> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 >> >> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >> www.keydrive.lu >> >> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. >> >> -------------------------------------------- >> >> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Volker A. Greimann >> - legal department - >> >> Key-Systems GmbH >> Im Oberen Werk 1 >> 66386 St. Ingbert >> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 >> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 >> Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net >> >> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com >> >> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: >> www.facebook.com/KeySystems >> www.twitter.com/key_systems >> >> CEO: Alexander Siffrin >> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 >> >> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP >> www.keydrive.lu >> >> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. > > > -- > Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613 > Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) > Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University > Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project > http://wendy.seltzer.org/ > https://www.chillingeffects.org/ > https://www.torproject.org/ > http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/

1 0