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!