August 2014 - Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

PLEASE RSVP Monthly GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Session
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 28, 2014

Aug. 28, 2014

Reminder: Monthly GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Session These ongoing monthly sessions are for new GNSO WG participants to come together and discuss any questions they may have about GNSO Working Groups, procedures and/or processes. We know there is a lot of information to digest when you join a GNSO Working Group and these monthly meetings are an opportunity for newcomers and more experienced participants to meet in an informal setting without the pressure of "real work" that needs be done. The agenda is flexible. The presenters will be ready with a standard set of materials if people would like to discuss them. Feel free to submit questions, either in advance or at the beginning of the meeting, if there is a topic that you would like to explore in more depth . Providing useful answers to a wide range of questions is part of the reason why these meetings are Thursday 4 September at 20.00 UTC Thursday 2 October at 12.00 UTC Thursday 6 November at 20.00 UTC Thursday 4 December at 12.00 UTC To convert to your local time zone, please see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html If you are interested to join the next meeting on 4 September or any of the future meetings, please let the GNSO Secretariat know ( <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> gnso-secs(a)icann.org) and we will send you the call details. If there are any specific questions you already have, or any overviews or introductions you think would be helpful (e.g. GNSO Policy Development Process or GNSO Working Group guidelines), please let us know in advance and we will prepare materials accordingly. Feel free to share this invitation with others that you think may be interested. We look forward to welcoming you at the next meeting! Nathalie Peregrine GNSO Secretariat

1 0

MP3 PPSAI WG - Tuesday 26 August 2014 at 1400 UTC
by Terri Agnew Aug. 26, 2014

Aug. 26, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working group call held on Tuesday 26 August 2014 at 14:00 UTC at: <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140826-en.mp3> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140826-en.mp3 On page: <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Steve Metalitz - IPC Graeme Bunton – RrSG Val Sherman – IPC Griffin Barnett – IPC Tatiana Khramtsova – RrSG Frank Michlick – Individual Volker Greimann-RrSG Don Blumenthal – RySG David Heasley-IPC Jim Bikoff-IPC James Bladel - RrSG Michele Neylon – RrSG Alex Deacon – IPC Chris Pelling – RrSG Stephanie Perrin – NCSG Tobias Sattler – RrSG Todd Williams – IPC Kathy Kleiman – NCSG Phil Corwin – BC Justin Macy - BC Lindsay Hamilton-Reid – RrSG Susan Kawaguchi – BC Kristina Rosette – IPC Darcy Southwell – RrSG Amr Elsadr – NCUC Paul McGrady – IPC Libby Baney – BC Phil Marano – IPC Apologies : Holly Raiche – ALAC Sarah Wyld - RrSG ICANN staff: Mary Wong Marika Konings Amy Bivins Danielle Andela Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: <https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg> https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg Thank you. Kind regards, Terri ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 26 August 2014: Terri Agnew 2:Dear all, welcome to the PPSAI call on the 26th August 2014 Tobias Sattler:Hi Stephanie Perrin:HI everybody! Graeme Bunton:G'morning Stephanie Kristina Rosette:Hi everyone. I'll likely be on mute for most of the call. Don Blumenthal:I hope that everyone will be except when speaking. :) Stephanie Perrin:Good morning Graeme, how is my fav Canadian registrar doing? Graeme Bunton:Just fine, thanks. You should come visit! Chris Pelling:afternoon all Michele Neylon:facilitator? Terri Agnew:Amr Elsadr and Kathy Kleiman has joined Terri Agnew:James Bladel has now joined Michele Neylon:we speak the good English we do Kristina Rosette:I've clearly missed this. Why a facilitator? Mary Wong:There will therefore be two facilitators - one from Incite (who some of you may have worked with as they are doing the ICANN Academy facilitation training) and Thomas, our "community facilitator", who will assist. Marika Konings:Thanks for those of you who already confirmed their participation. If there are others that have not done so yet, but are planning to participate in person or remotely, please let staff know off-list so we can take a a head-count Stephanie Perrin:what is the date again? Kristina Rosette:My question can be answered later, offline Marika Konings:Friday 10 October Terri Agnew:Don we are unable to hear you Don Blumenthal:OK. I'll experiment Mary Wong:@Kristina, the idea for the F2F all-day session is part of the FY15 pilot project approved by the GNSO Council - to select a current GNSO WG that's at a stage of its work and as such can benefit from a F2F session assisted by facilitators. Terri Agnew:Paul McGrady has joined Marika Konings:To add, this follows from GNSO Council discussions as well as ATRT2 recommendations Mary Wong:In London the Council agreed that our WG - since we're aiming for an Initial Report in early 2015 - would be a good choice for the pilot. Paul McGrady:Good morning all. Sorry to be tardy. Terri Agnew:Val Sherman has joined Marika Konings:The idea is to explore whether facilitation as well as F2F time help PDP WGs in moving forward in their deliberations and what impact this potentially has on the overall timeline Kathy:Good questions Kathy:Hi All! Stephanie Perrin:@Mary and Marika, thanks for the reminders! Mary Wong:The proposed definitions are in the right hand side pod of your screen Terri Agnew:tatiana Khramtsova has joined Graeme Bunton:Agreed Kathy:Good definitions Kathy:person should mean individual, corporate, organizational Terri Agnew:David Heasley is on audio Kathy:@Mary/scribe: I don't think legal entity/organizational is the same thing. They should and often are different. Bladel:"and lo, I looked upon the Revlataions in WHOIS..." Amr Elsadr:or "means revealing a person..., steve metalitz:"to reveal a" works Kathy:not all organizations are incorporated, and many a collection of individuals Mary Wong:@James, per Kathy's comment, can you repeat your suggestion? Stephanie Perrin:so we should fix it... Kristina Rosette:Agree with Michele about not changing the term. Like Steve's suggested edit. Mary Wong:@Steve, @Kristina - does the current formulation in the pod now work? Bladel:@Mary: "person, legal entity, or organization..." Bladel:someting like that. Stephanie Perrin:@michele so how about we define "reveal": used in this context as a noun....etc Stephanie Perrin:I certainly like it better Steve! Graeme Bunton:I think so too, steve Kathy:I would like to recommend thalt we talk about publication after disclosure (the details, that is) Mary Wong:I've linked the word "Reveal" (capitalized) to the specific issue of Whois contact details - hope that helps Kathy:Tx Steve! Mary Wong:Note that in the charter questions for this category, in addition to a specific question about safeguards (Q4) there are also Qs for, e.g.: "7. What specific alleged violations of the provider’s terms of service, if any, would be sufficient to trigger publication of the registrant/owner’s contact information?" Terri Agnew:Don is back on telephone Mary Wong:@Steve, yes we were - let us know if we should do that (the compilation is on Template E) Mary Wong:Apologies - Template E only has the provider responses for Relay; we will compile and add for Reveal to Template F. Amr Elsadr:@James: Curious about the recent events leading to requiring the indication of a more formal process. :) Amr Elsadr:Thanks James. Bladel:@Amr - sure, let's catch up in LA. :) Terri Agnew:Libby Baney has joined audio Kathy:Hi Don, can address general issues now? Kathy:Intro statements - so to speak? Kathy:That's where Steve was going... Bladel:that was me. Don't want to be unfair to Steve. :) Don Blumenthal:Thanks, Kathy. I didn't hear Steve's question. Bladel:NOt sure how we/ICANN could effectively do that. Amr Elsadr:Not sure how limitations on 3d parties can be imposed at all. Marika Konings:We've updated the template with the information from the sample relating to reveal and will upload that now in Adobe Connect (and distribute following the call) Kathy:I like the idea of notifying the customer first ... Kathy:@Amr, we might seek to limit further access to that requestor... and there may be data protection law limitations as well Kathy:Steve et all: forgive the phrasing, but is "mere allegation" enough? Amr Elsadr:@Kathy: Not sure what you mean by limited access. Can't contact information be copied down? steve metalitz:@Kathy, prima facie evidence Bladel:"digital asylum." Terri Agnew:Phil Marano has joined Kathy:tx James! Kathy:Also, if we provide good guidance, most of the Requestors will probably honor the limitations... Bladel:As service providers, our first duty is to our businesses. But we cetainly don't want to jeopardize anyone's (or the public's) safety. Bladel:@Michele - exactly. Copyright of religious materials to squelch criticims. Or building religions around racism/hate speech in an effort to call it "protected speech" Michele Neylon:James - we've had all sorts of fun Kathy:So are we moving towards an endorsement of p/p processes and due processes...? Kathy:@Mary/scribes, could we expand Notes to include Jusrisdiction/due process generally? Susan Kawaguchi:@ James do you have an idea on how often you would "nuke" the domain name? Amr Elsadr:@Kathy: +1 Justin Macy:@Michele and @James, but what if you are just a p/p provider and don't have authority of taking down a website? Michele Neylon:Justin - the domain has to be with a registrars Michele Neylon:it cannot be registered magically Graeme Bunton:I don't think anything we' Justin Macy:Right, but if I'm a p/p provider I don't have to be affiliated with a registrar. Right? Michele Neylon:and the proxy / prviacy provider cannot pull a domain as easily as a registrar or registry Graeme Bunton:ve discussed prevents a service provider from acting on a violation of it's toS Kathy:+1 Volker Amr Elsadr:@Volker: +1 on baselines. :) Kathy:@Volker: Interesting, it may a terms of service issue, not a Reveal issue... Mary Wong:@Kathy, @Volker, note this Q in Cat F to follow: "7. What specific alleged violations of the provider’s terms of service, if any, would be sufficient to trigger publication of the registrant/owner’s contact information?" Paul McGrady:Sorry that my Internet connection keeps dropping Kathy:@Mary -- or takedown... Kathy:@James, digital asylum is a great term Don Blumenthal:Kathy, no matter how one might define "asylum." Alex Deacon:@James - +1 on following the 80/20 rule here. Kathy::-) Graeme Bunton:yep, good discussion everyone Bladel:"baseline" is good. But we should pursue ideas liek "illegal activity" vs. speicifcally naming conduct, etc. Darcy Southwell:Thanks Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye.

1 0

Agenda and additional points to note for WG call on Tuesday 26 August
by Mary Wong Aug. 26, 2014

Aug. 26, 2014

Dear all, The proposed agenda for our next Working Group call on Tuesday 26 August is as follows: 1. Roll Call/Updates to SOI 2. Continue deliberations on F-1 (updated template attached) 3. [if time permits] Commence deliberations on F-2 (initial draft template attached) 4. Next steps Please also note the following additional points: (1) In initial discussions last week, the WG agreed on the need to distinguish between ³disclosure² of a P/P customer¹s details to a third party requestor, and ³publication² of those details in Whois. To that end, the following definition was proposed via email, and has been added to the template for F-1 as a suggested Preliminary Conclusion: > ³Publication² - means the reveal of a person¹s (I.e. the licensee or > beneficial owner of a registered domain name) identity/contact details in the > Whois system > ³Disclosure² - means the reveal of a person¹s (i.e. the licensee or beneficial > owner of a registered domain name) identity/contact details to a third party > requestor. > (2) The WG Chairs note that this Category F contains several potentially overlapping questions; as such, discussions under F-1 and F-2 may well ³spill over² into or get taken up by discussions of the other questions and some of the remaining Category F questions may be combined following our next call. For your convenience, here are the remaining Category F questions: > F-2: Should ICANN-accredited privacy/proxy service providers be required to > reveal customer identities for the specific purpose of ensuring timely service > of cease and desist letters? > F-3: What forms of alleged malicious conduct, if any, and what evidentiary > standard would be sufficient to trigger a reveal? > F-4: What safeguards must be put in place to ensure adequate protections for > privacy and freedom of expression? > F-5: What circumstances, if any, would warrant access to registrant data by > law enforcement agencies? > F-6: What clear, workable, enforceable and standardized processes should be > adopted by ICANN-accredited privacy/proxy services in order to regulate such > access (if such access is warranted)? > F-7: What specific alleged violations of the provider¹s terms of service, if > any, would be sufficient to trigger publication of the registrant/owner¹s > contact information? > F-8: What safeguards or remedies should be available in cases where > publication is found to have been unwarranted? > F-9: What are the contractual obligations, if any, that if unfulfilled would > justify termination of customer access by ICANN-accredited privacy/proxy > service providers? 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

2 1

MP3 PPSAI WG - Tuesday 19 August 2014 at 1400 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 24, 2014

Aug. 24, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working group call held on Tuesday 19 August 2014 at 14:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140819-en.mp3 On page: <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Steve Metalitz - IPC Graeme Bunton – RrSG Val Sherman – IPC Griffin Barnett – IPC Tatiana Khramtsova – RrSG Frank Michlick – Individual Volker Greimann-RrSG Don Blumenthal – RySG Holly Raiche – ALAC David Heasley-IPC Jim Bikoff-IPC Carlton Samuels – ALAC Keith Kupferschmid- IPC James Bladel - RrSG Michele Neylon – RrSG Alex Deacon – IPC Chris Pelling – RrSG Luc Seufer- RrSG Stephanie Perrin – NCSG Daniel Burke – Individual Tobias Sattler – RrSG Roy Balleste – NCUC Todd Williams – IPC Kathy Kleiman – NCSG Phil Corwin – BC Justin Macy - BC Phil Marano - IPC Apologies: Lindsay Hamilton-Reid – RrSG Susan Prosser - RrSG Christian Dawson-ISPCP Sarah Wyld - RrSG Susan Kawaguchi – BC Kristina Rosette – IPC Darcy Southwell – RrSG John Horton – BC Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP ICANN staff: Mary Wong Marika Konings Amy Bivins Danielle Andela Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: <https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg> https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 19 August 2014: Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the PPSAI call on the 19th August 2014 Nathalie Peregrine:Hello Holly, the operator will dial out to you in a minute Holly Raiche:Thanks Nathalie Peregrine:James Bladel has joined the call Nathalie Peregrine:Jim Bikoff has joine the audio bridge Carlton Samuels:Morning all Nathalie Peregrine:Chris Pelling has also joined th call Nathalie Peregrine:Luc Seufer has joined the AC room Chris Pelling:afternoon all, sorry for my tardiness Nathalie Peregrine:Stephanie Perrin has joined the call Nathalie Peregrine:Kristina Rosette sends her apology. stephanie perrin:Sorry for my tardiness stephanie perrin:sorry, csn you repeat the question Kathy:yes Don Blumenthal:We can hear you Val Sherman 2:We can hear you, Stephanie stephanie perrin:dont seem to have audio....will try to reconnect steve metalitz:we hear you stephanie Carlton Samuels:That question of what must be forwarded. That answer compels knowledge of what is received, meaning a triage operation to determine. So, are we back to asking P/P providers to read and/or request validation inforamtion? Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the AC room stephanie perrin:oh sorry I will get back in the queue.... Michele Neylon:+1 to James steve metalitz:@james ,what are non-legal individuals? Bladel:non-lawyers. Michele Neylon:we get those $random threats Michele Neylon:"it's illegal" Bladel:threats to engage a lawyer by a non-lawyer = "legal communciation"? Michele Neylon:"it's offensive" Michele Neylon:all sent from $random gmail addresses Michele Neylon:with zero proper contact details stephanie perrin:I believe Michele and James are making my point. Carlton Samuels:@Stephanie: I agree with you on the first part. Quite apart from those relay required by the RAA, the rest is left to the P/P provider. steve metalitz:+1 Kathy, the definitions do not need to be the same for relay and reveal. Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: I can support different response frameworks for relay and reveal. +1 steve metalitz:@James So a photographer for example would need to retain a lawyer in order to try to contact the registrant of a website where her photo is displayed witout authorization? Bladel:Yes. Lower bar for relay. Higher bar (subpoena, court order, warrant) for reveal. Carlton Samuels:@Volker: +1 on distilling principles. We down in the weeds here Bladel:@Steve: The issue was whether to treat 3rd party (non-LEA) reports equally, or whether "legal communications" were somehow privileged. Since we cannot clearly define the latter, I propose we treat all reports on a level basis. stephanie perrin:@Steve, I dont think this is fair. AS I said, whichever way you fall on this it is not fair....I should be able to send a good faith exposition of the facts and have it relayed, without being or hiring a lawyer. steve metalitz:+1 Stephanie steve metalitz:@stepahnie or we could recommend that a standard form be part of implementation Nathalie Peregrine:John Horton is also an apology for this call Val Sherman 2:+ 1 Stephanie -- form could require certain basic information. Carlton Samuels:@Steph on form. I'm afraid we'd be too prescriptive for a policy position! Nathalie Peregrine:Osvaldo Novoa also sends apologies Graeme Bunton:+1 James, stephanie perrin:@Carlton....I understand we have limitations, but some basic requirements could be mandated....more as a guideline to set expectations (as in, if you want your stuff forwarded, here is what best practice says you have to supply,... Kathy:+1 James Griffin Barnett:@James, I understand your position, but at the same time, the legitimate complainants shouldn't be constrained on account of the bad actors; also agree with Stephanie Bladel:@Griffin: This is why we need to be able to filter/screen the "chaff" to ensure that the legiimate complaints get thru. Kathy:Quick note to the scribe that the idea of a web-based menu may not align with an RDS service. Couldyou sever the two ideas please? Mary Wong:@Kathy, apologies, that was me - I'd thought you'd said the concept that James had suggested was compatible but yes, will change. Kathy:@Mary! Kathy:@Mary - tx! Val Sherman 2:@james -- isnt that the difference between reveal and publication? Kathy:That's a good question - what is reveal? Volker Greimann:+1 James: We may want to differentiate those terms Bladel:I thought we had established differences between "reveal" and "disclose"? Alex Deacon:I thought we had also... Don Blumenthal:There are differences but I don't think we decided how they would play out in pracice. Don Blumenthal:practice Mary Wong:@James, you're right that this was discussed and as Don says, the WG may need to delve further into it. The word "reveal" here is used broadly, and was taken from the Whois RT Report - where the Whois RT recommended minimum standard relay and reveal processes. Bladel:ALso, the provider still has the right to cancel service for violation of TOS, non-payment, etc. Kathy:@James: I view "reveal" as sharing information to the Requestor (some info), but Publication as disclosure to the world in the Whois Griffin Barnett:+1 Kathy, I thought this was the terminology we used when creating our categories steve metalitz:Agree we should have standard terminology for the two forms of "reveal" . Certainly provider needs to have broad discretion to terminate its service for a range of reasons (e.g., non-payment?). stephanie perrin:We don't want to get down into the weeds Don, but we should not continue to violate existing law...my view of course Don Blumenthal:We aren't. The providers would be. :) stephanie perrin:We are into the world of remedies here...cancellation, as James has pointed out, is an effective remedy, publishing data, which could be dangerous or a violation of law, may be a less effective remedy. Volker Greimann:James +1 steve metalitz:@James +1 on ability of provider to enforce terms of service Graeme Bunton:agreed with Steve and James Kathy:@James: would there be any terms of service that do not notify a customer prior to disclosure? Luc Seufer:UDRP for once Bladel:@Kathy - Not sure. But that would be one way for providers to differentiate themselves. Bladel:Eactly, Luc. stephanie perrin:Suppose someone else has hacked the site a common risk for human rights folks and dissenters.... Carlton Samuels:Thank you all Kathy:@Mary: Can we add notes re: "reveal" also to Requestor - as alternative? Kathy:Tx Don! stephanie perrin:Thanks all!

2 1

For your review: Draft Preliminary Conclusions for E-1 & E-2
by Mary Wong Aug. 22, 2014

Aug. 22, 2014

Dear WG members, Attached please find a draft set of suggested, consolidated Preliminary Conclusions for both Charter Questions E-1 and E-2. The draft has been reviewed by the Chairs, who welcome your feedback as to whether it accurately captures the WG¹s deliberations and minimum set of recommendations to date on this Charter category. 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

1 0

Update on PPSAI F2F WG Meeting in Los Angeles
by Marika Konings Aug. 21, 2014

Aug. 21, 2014

Dear All, Please note that all the GNSO SGs/ACs have now identified their 'sponsored by hotel night' participants for the PPSAI F2F WG meeting in Los Angeles on Friday 10 October (please see the list below). Those listed below should be contacted by ICANN Constituency Travel with further details soon. If there are any other WG members that are dependent on the coverage of their hotel night (Thursday 9 October) in order to participate, please let us know off-list as we may be able to accommodate a couple of additional WG members. In order to get an accurate headcount (and make sure there is enough coffee and lunch for everyone) please also let us know off-list if you are planning to attend even without hotel night support. Remote participation facilities will also be available for those planning to participate remotely. We'll now start working with the chairs and the facilitators on the proposed agenda which we hope to share with you in due course. Best regards, Marika Confirmed Participants PPSAI F2F WG Meeting in Los Angeles Friday 10 October 2014 NCSG * David Cake * Amr Elsadr * Wendy Seltzer * Kathy Kleiman CSG * Phil Corwin - BC * Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP * Christian Dawson - ISPCP * David Hughes - IPC * Victoria Sheckler - IPC RrSG * James Bladel * Graeme Bunton * Michele Neylon RySG * Don Blumenthal * Bret Fausett ALAC * Holly Raiche

2 2

Proposal contactability
by Volker Greimann Aug. 19, 2014

Aug. 19, 2014

As Susan and Steve have repeatedly asked what my proposal would be to ensure contactability of the beneficial owner/registrant. As a basis, a spec derivative of the WAP spec to the RAA would have to be developed. I took the liberty of modifying the WAP for this purpose as a basis for discussion. This would bring the obligation of the privacy service provider to validate and verify the contact details to the same level of that of the registrar, thus ensuring the Service Provider has either accurate details or a duty to verify and validate. Now, I would agree that some level of a contactibility guarantee is warranted. This could be something to this tune, as a basis for discussion: /"Service Provider are required provide a means for third parties to directly or indirectly communicate with the Beneficial Owner. Such means may include any of the following:// //a) providing a postal mail//forwarding address// //b) providing a collective email point of contact for all domain names under the Service (such as abuse(a)service.provider)// //c) providing an individual email point of contact for each domain name under the Service (such as string(a)domain.name or domain.name(a)service.provider) ... ... // //Service Provider must inform potential complainants about the accepted means of communication on its website. Service provider may refuse to forward, process or even accept communications sent by a non-accepted means of communication. //In case forwarding of //postal //communications is offered, Service Provider may charge complainant reasonable handling fees and costs for the forwarding service and defer the forwarding of communications until payment is received. //Service Provider may refuse to forward spam, duplicate messages, purchase or business inquiries, harrassing communications, anonymous communications and/or unwanted communications. Service Provider is authorized to update or modify the means of communication from time to time. Service Provider is authorized to blacklist complainants with a history of abusing the provided means of communication."/ All subject to further discussion, ofc. I realize this draft goes into detail more than we should in this WG, but having been asked for a proposal, I felt it necessary in order to move the discussion ahead. Terms: Service Provider - Privacy/Proxy Service Provider Beneficial Owner - Replaces "Registrant" filter - not deliver to Beneficial owner Service - the privacy/proxy services -- 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.

16 35

PPSAI
by Susan Kawaguchi Aug. 19, 2014

Aug. 19, 2014

It has been an interesting discussion on email this week but unfortunately I am on my way to the airport to catch a flight so will not be joining the call this morning. Looking forward to catching up on the discussion later in the week. Best, Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Legal Dept. Phone - 650 485-6064

2 1

MP3 PPSAI WG - Tuesday 12 August 2014 at 1400 UTC
by Terri Agnew Aug. 12, 2014

Aug. 12, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working group call held on Tuesday 12 August 2014 at 14:00 UTC at: <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140812-en.mp3> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140812-en.mp3 On page: <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Steve Metalitz - IPC Sarah Wyld - RrSG Chris Pelling – RrSG Darcy Southwell - RrSG Graeme Bunton – RrSG Val Sherman – IPC Griffin Barnett – IPC Susan Kawaguchi – BC Tatiana Khramtsova – RrSG Frank Michlick – Individual Luc Seufer- RrSG Volker Greimann-RrSG Don Blumenthal – RySG Libby Baney-BC Holly Raiche – ALAC David Heasley-IPC Jim Bikoff-IPC Stephanie Perrin – NCSG Paul McGrady – IPC Carlton Samuels – ALAC Osvaldo Novoa – ISPCP Keith Kupferschmid- IPC Phil Marano - IPC James Bladel - RrSG Amr Elsadr - NCUC Susan Prosser - RrSG Christian Dawson-ISPCP Apologies: Alex Deacon – IPC Kristina Rosette – IPC Lindsay Hamilton-Reid – RrSG Michele Neylon – RrSG ICANN staff: Mary Wong Marika Konings Amy Bivins Danielle Andela Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: <https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg> https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 12 August 2014: Terri Agnew:Welcome to the PPSAI WG Meeting of 12 August 2014 Val Sherman:Good morning all Chris Pelling:Afternoon all :) Don Blumenthal:First mute reminder of the morning. Carlton Samuels:Morning all Carlton Samuels:Hi DOn Holly Raiche:Evening all Carlton Samuels:Hi Holly Holly Raiche:@ Carlton - Hi There Danielle Andela:Good morning from LA! Bladel:James also here. :) Carlton Samuels:We have an echo Luc Seufer:Afternoon Carlton Samuels:No Don. Graeme Bunton:Yep Carlton Samuels:Still echo Chris Pelling:nope Val Sherman:nope Keith Kupferschmid:no echo here Terri Agnew:Jim Bikoff and Luc Seufer has joined O. Novoa:the sound is OK for me Carlton Samuels:Good now; no echo Mary Wong:Please use either the AC audio or the phone bridge, and mute your mic when not speaking in any case. Terri Agnew:Stephanie Perrin has joined Mary Wong:Yes, 6 hotl nights per SG Terri Agnew:Stephanie Perrin has joined Mary Wong:hotel Terri Agnew:Susan Kawaguchi has joined stephanie perrin:Can't hear Steve... stephanie perrin:sorry ignore that... Terri Agnew:Frank Michlick has joined Terri Agnew:Amr Elsadr has joined Graeme Bunton:Chilling effect Bladel:An equivalent example would be TMCH claims on generic terms, intimidating registratns to abandon legitimate registrations. Terri Agnew:Susan Prosser has joined Bladel:But at a minimum, there should be an escalation path. Carlton Samuels:How do you validate that standard except to check against a set of attributes? Carlton Samuels:..and what would 'checking' entail? Who would have the duty of care? The sender or the P/P provider? Terri Agnew:Lindsay Hamilton-Reid has sent apologies Holly Raiche:Arguably, the duty of care is on the middle person - the P/P provider? Graeme Bunton:That's useful insight James Carlton Samuels:end user as in the P/P customer? steve metalitz:+1 Paul: the p/p customer may be more harmed by provider's failure to relay than by the relay Luc Seufer:For once, I will differ from my registrar colleagues. I am fine relaying (as in putting in place an fully automated email forwarding system). I don't want to be put in a position where I am to judge the merit of a complaint that isn't addressed to us Bladel:Not concerned about that, to be honeset. Bladel:The Registration Agreement requires the registrant to abide by ICANN policies, and the PP service agreement would probably do the same. Luc Seufer:In any case we'll happily provide them with an email service with a strong anti-spam filter to block those unsolicited emails Graeme Bunton:And that discretion is used every day... Chris Pelling:for example to Volker point, the email from one registrar to another registrar for the right of transfer, this email being excluded if requested by the customer to protect their domain Chris Pelling:from hijacking Bladel:I agree with Steve. Bladel:The status quo is "no standard." So we are definitely changing that. stephanie perrin:I think Volker is correct, and this calls for a very serious risk assessment. Carlton Samuels:I would have thought the reason for the specs is that the 'status quo' is all over the place. So, is there a practice we could look to as 'best practice'? Holly Raiche:Refer back to the Whois FinalReport - and its recommendation for a P/P accreditation process - which is where we are now Chris Pelling:Michele has wanted to voice his support and position the same as Luc Carlton Samuels:And if it can be identified, can we bring it gorward here for advice and consent? Terri Agnew:Christian Dawson has joined Volker Greimann:wow Chris Pelling:are they ok ? Carlton Samuels:Damn! Amr Elsadr:!! stephanie perrin:We need to identify the problem before we identify best practice, it seems to me. Luc Seufer:I told them house 145! Darn it they hit the wrong one again Carlton Samuels:Hope your neighbour is physically not damaged Carlton Samuels:@Luc: LOLOLOL O. Novoa:sorry but I have to leave, my flight is boarding. bye Holly Raiche:Agree with Stephanie's question Carlton Samuels:Need to have better oversight of your taliban my friend Terri Agnew:Bye Osvaldo Carlton Samuels:@Stephanie: +1. Which is why I asked for establishing the problem by its attributes THEN from that would flow the best practice for treating it Chris Pelling:Volker does that not come down to having to read the comm then Don Blumenthal:One reason for a privacy registration. Folks don't know what address to aim for.. Terri Agnew:Michele Neylon sends his apologies Luc Seufer:@DOn good one! Chris Pelling:@Don - USP Volker Greimann:someone is talking in the back Volker Greimann:can hardly hear James Don Blumenthal:James, a paper version of a DDoS? Amr Elsadr:I'm not hearing anything in the background Volker. Is it your line? Chris Pelling:@Don lol Volker Greimann:it seems to be the operators Chris Pelling:@James totally correct Carlton Samuels:@physical communication. You get a chance to eyeball it. So I quite agree at minimum there must be leeway for the P/P provider to use best judgment for forwarding. Amr Elsadr:Maybe an email notification to the customer asking if they would like the physical mail sent + covering the cost?? Graeme Bunton:We recently got a an elaborate and large piece of burned wood art sent to our service Carlton Samuels:Respect to costs, that should be between the P/P provider and its customer. Chris Pelling:sorry the cost should not be born by the customer Chris Pelling:its the sender that wants to send something Holly Raiche:I I thought where we got up to last week was to confine reqirements to email and then P/P providerscan offer services above hat (unless there is no email relay? Paul McGrady:Thanks everyone. I need to drop off for my next call. Bladel:I agree there are interdependencies Chris Pelling:agree with holly in that I thought this was sorted last week Bladel:I am sorry, I need to drop the call. Volker Greimann:oh bugger, yes, it was my issue Chris Pelling:Don again that takes the rights of the individual away Luc Seufer:limit forwarding to reasonable limits. e.g. 2 meg. email will be forwarded / 2 pages document sent by registred mail will be scanned and emailed. Carlton Samuels:@Susan: I would not go there. The P/P provider would ahve established a contact modality with the customer as a base requirement for accredtation. Chris Pelling:ie the rights of the domain owner Amr Elsadr:Thanks. Carlton Samuels:I would sanction relay by whatever means they establish Amr Elsadr:Bye. Susan Kawaguchi:Thanks all Danielle Andela:thanks Luc Seufer:thanks Carlton Samuels:Thanks all

1 0

P/P abuse policy
by Don Blumenthal Aug. 12, 2014

Aug. 12, 2014

I received this link in email about five minutes ago because of an antiabuse matter that I’m working on. I wish that it had shown up earlier. Sampling language like this definitely will be useful in Reveal discussions and may help in our review of what’s “abuse” in the context of Relay. https://www.namecheap.com/legal/whoisguard/whoisguard-agreement.aspx#8 Don

3 3