Hello everyone,
As this Sub Team is due to make its next/final report to the full WG next week (1 September), I thought I’d write to follow up on the “action items” noted after the last call we did on 12 August (below).
On Question 1, I believe that Christian and Kiran will send proposed language to this group for your review and, hopefully consensus.
For Questions 2 & 3, it was agreed that the Sub Team as a whole would likely need to further discuss its conclusions/recommendations. I will note here also that we have not yet discussed Question 4, though in that regard perhaps I can suggest that staff take a stab at summarizing them for your review. This suggestion is based on the fact that these represent a collection of comments that relate generally to our topic rather than specific responses to Questions 1, 2 or 3.
As such, would it make sense for the Sub Team to try to do a call to go over the above, perhaps on Friday 28 August or Monday 31 August, presuming that everyone will have had a chance to send and/or read the latest documents by then?
Thanks and cheers
Mary
Hello Sub Team members,
For the benefit of those who could not join us on the Sub Team call earlier today and to document next steps for this group, here are the “action items” that were agreed on by those on the call:
Approach to the Save Domain Privacy and Respect Our Privacy petition, comments and statements:
- Kiran and Christian will work on draft suggested language for the Sub Team in respect of Question 1. While everyone agreed that these comments show a huge wave of support for user privacy to be respected and against restricting privacy services based on the word “commercial” used as a distinction, there was no agreement that this general support is totally dispositive of the various specific issues and options that had been raised by the Working Group in our Initial Report.
- ADDITIONAL NOTE: I went and prepared a general summary on the additional comments that accompanied the Save Domain Privacy petition i.e. the additional comments that the organizers sent in, containing specific comments from many of the signatories. I’ll circulate this separately, in the hope that this summary will be helpful as you finalize the Sub Team’s recommendations.
Treating Question 1 as a “threshold” question to Questions 2 and 3:
- It was agreed that this may not be possible, since some comments noted that the answer to Question 1 might depend on the answer to Question 2. It was suggested that Question 2 might in fact be a more appropriate “threshold” question, although that was not how it was framed in the Initial Report.
Next steps:
- Sub Team to discuss draft language from Kiran and Christian (next week?)
- Sub Team to continue review of the summary analysis to Questions 1 & 2, and possibly also 3 as well
Please note that the WG Work Plan currently has this Sub Team scheduled to provide its final recommended actions on Section 1.3.3 to the full WG on 1 September (i.e. about two and a half weeks from now). Assuming you think that is a realistic deadline, this would seem to call for at least one call late next week or early the following week, prior to which hopefully you will have had the chance to review all the documents prepared by Lindsay and Terri, and the forthcoming proposed language from Kiran and Christian.
Thanks and cheers
Mary
Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4889