Agenda and additional points to note for WG call on Tuesday 26 August
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@icann.org
Mary & Team: Apologies, but I may be a few minutes late joining today's call. Thanks! J. From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Monday, August 25, 2014 at 13:00 To: "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Agenda and additional points to note for WG call on Tuesday 26 August 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 "disclosure" of a P/P customer's details to a third party requestor, and "publication" 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: "Publication" - means the reveal of a person's (I.e. the licensee or beneficial owner of a registered domain name) identity/contact details in the Whois system "Disclosure" - means the reveal of a person's (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 "spill over" 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 provider's terms of service, if any, would be sufficient to trigger publication of the registrant/owner's 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@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>
participants (2)
-
James M. Bladel -
Mary Wong