Received: from CY1PR0701MB1616.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.163.20.153) by BY1PR0701MB1609.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.162.110.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.225.19 via Mailbox Transport; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:51 +0000 Received: from BY2PR07CA054.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.141.251.29) by CY1PR0701MB1616.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.163.20.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.225.19; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:50 +0000 Received: from BN1BFFO11FD042.protection.gbl (2a01:111:f400:7c10::1:106) by BY2PR07CA054.outlook.office365.com (2a01:111:e400:2c61::29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.225.19 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:50 +0000 Received: from edge.turner.com (157.166.156.200) by BN1BFFO11FD042.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.58.144.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.243.9 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:49 +0000 Received: from NYCTBSHUB02.turner.com (10.4.65.156) by edge.turner.com (10.164.240.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 09:13:29 -0400 Received: from nycmail2.turner.com (10.164.232.10) by NYCTBSHUB02.turner.com (10.4.65.163) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 09:13:28 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppmprmsd [127.0.0.1]) by ppmprmsd.turner.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id t74DCqjx008439 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 09:13:28 -0400 Received: from smtp01.icann.org (smtp01.icann.org [192.0.33.81]) by ppmprmsd.turner.com with ESMTP id 1w2x31r09c-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 09:13:27 -0400 Received: from mm.icann.org (mm.icann.org [192.0.32.100]) by smtp01.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t74DD9bp004494; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:09 GMT Received: from mm.icann.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC62761AFB0; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pechora5.dc.icann.org (pechora5.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:71]) by mm.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C53886004F4 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-1.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) by pechora5.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t74DCkb1007516 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:13:06 GMT Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-2.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 06:12:44 -0700 Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1044.021; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 06:12:43 -0700 From: Mary Wong CC: "gnso-ppsai3@icann.org" Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai3] Submissions/compilation Thread-Topic: [Gnso-ppsai3] Submissions/compilation Thread-Index: AQHQzrc/HnHooK78HUyyUSne/0z6BA== Sender: "gnso-ppsai3-bounces@icann.org" Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:12:43 +0000 Message-ID: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: NYCTBSHUB02.turner.com X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SenderIdResult: Neutral X-MS-Exchange-Organization-Network-Message-Id: 6acf384b-b922-4603-d5ee-08d29cce8951 X-MS-Exchange-Organization-PRD: icann.org X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-proofpoint-spf-result: neutral x-proofpoint-spam-details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1305240000 definitions=main-1508040217 x-proofpoint-virus-version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.14.151,1.0.33,0.0.0000 definitions=2015-08-04_06:2015-08-04,2015-08-04,1970-01-01 signatures=0 x-proofpoint-spf-record: v=spf1 ?all x-originating-ip: [192.0.47.234] x-crosspremisesheadersfiltered: BN1BFFO11FD042.protection.gbl x-organizationheaderspreserved: NYCTBSHUB02.turner.com x-crosspremisesheaderspromoted: BN1BFFO11FD042.protection.gbl x-forefront-antispam-report: =?utf-8?q?CIP=3A157=2E166=2E156=2E200=3BCTRY?= =?utf-8?b?OlVTO0lQVjpDQUw7SVBWOk5MSTtFRlY6TkxJO1NGVjpTS047U0ZTOjtESVI6SU5C?= =?utf-8?q?=3BSFP=3A=3BSCL=3A-1=3BSRVR=3ACY1PR0701MB1616=3BH=3Aedge=2Eturner?= =?utf-8?b?LmNvbTtGUFI6O1NQRjpOb25lO0xBTkc6Ow==?= x-originatororg: turner.onmicrosoft.com received-spf: Neutral (NYCTBSHUB02.turner.com: 10.164.232.10 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of gnso-ppsai3-bounces@icann.org) errors-to: gnso-ppsai3-bounces@icann.org user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.2.150604 list-id: authentication-results: spf=neutral (sender IP is 157.166.156.200) smtp.mailfrom=icann.org; turner.mail.onmicrosoft.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_005_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_" MIME-Version: 1.0 --_005_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_" --_000_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi everyone, The compiled template/matrix only contains those comments that directly res= ponded to one or more of the WG=92s preliminary recommendations and/or open= questions. It does not (at the moment) contain any content from any of the= form-based submissions (e.g. the template emails generated by online web c= ampaigns that were sent in the thousands). That=92s because the WG has yet = to discuss whether and how to treat these emails =96 although I=92ve sugges= ted to the Sub Teams that to the extent some of these submissions contain d= irect and specific comments relevant to the topic, the team may wish to con= sider recommending whether (or not) to include at least a reference to them= in the team=92s report. This may be something to discuss more fully with the WG as well; I=92ll fla= g it to the chairs. Thanks, Holly! Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4889 Email: mary.wong@icann.org From: Holly Raiche > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 01:57 To: Sara Bockey > Cc: Darcy Southwell >, "Williams, Todd" >, Mary Wong >, "gnso-ppsai3@icann.org" > Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai3] Thoughts on a work plan Folks I=92m sure I have missed something, but it isn=92t clear to me where the= list of submitters on Todd=92s list comes from. The individual submissions on the website (not including survey response= s) run to 35 pages, with between 40-50 submissions per page - which is a lo= t more than the 76 submissions listed on Todd=92s list (and ALAC isn=92t in= cluded in any of the three baskets) The vast majority of individual submissions would fall into either the n= o, never, or the only under court order/subpoena/legal requirement, and so = implicitly would reject Annex E. So Mary (of Todd or whomever) If you have a list of those submissions th= at do not either reject outright any revealing of information at all, or on= ly do so under some kind of legal order/process, I would be very grateful. Thanks HOlly On 4 Aug 2015, at 7:41 am, Sara Bockey > wrote: I can tackle the 31 in Bucket 1. Sara From: > on behalf of Darcy Southwell Date: Monday, August 3, 2015 at 12:00 PM To: "Williams, Todd", Mary Wong, "gnso-ppsai3@icann.org" Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai3] Thoughts on a work plan Sorry for my silence on these latest emails and missing last week=92s= meeting; I=92m just returning from vacation with my family and getting cau= ght up on email. Todd=92s proposal for dividing the issues into two questions seems to= make sense. To Holly=92s point, maybe we can be sure to have two distinct= categories for =93What arguments did they make?=94: (1) the no, never und= er any circumstances, and (2) the ones that said only with a legal process = (court order. subpoena) and include the stats to give some more color. I=92ve only skimmed the latest document against Todd=92s categorizati= ons, but they look fairly accurate at this point. I can take the 21 in Bucket 3. Thanks, Darcy From: > on behalf of "Williams, Todd" > Date: Monday, August 3, 2015 at 11:17 AM To: Mary Wong >, "gns= o-ppsai3@icann.org" > Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai3] Thoughts on a work plan Thanks Mary. No, I hadn=92t made any edits to the document. Just us= ed it to review as I grouped the comments into the three buckets. Does anybody on the sub-team have any objection to dividing the work = this way? Or, if not, to my initial tentative placement of each of the com= ments into those three buckets? I=92m certainly open to any suggestions th= at a comment that I had read/understood as going in Bucket One should inste= ad be grouped in Bucket Two, etc. If not, shall we divide up to start revi= ewing these in more detail so that we can be ready to present by next Tuesd= ay? I=92ll go first and am happy to take the 24 comments in Bucket Two (pl= us Turner=92s, which would make 25). Anybody want to join me? Anybody wan= t to volunteer for the 31 comments in Bucket One or the 21 in Bucket 3? Th= anks all! From: Mary Wong [mailto:mary.wong@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 6:06 PM To: Williams, Todd >; gnso-ppsai3@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai3] Thoughts on a work plan Hello Todd and everyone, Welcome to the Sub Team 3 (Annex E) mailing list! Todd - I think you just found an omission from staff (me), for which = I apologize. I definitely had the Turner comment in my compilation of comme= nts and documents, but I think what happened is that in formatting the tabl= e for the Word document I somehow managed to edit that out. I am very sorry= , and thanks for noting it! This is exactly why staff welcomes WG members= =92 questions, and why we emphasize that our compilation/edits don=92t repl= ace WG members=92 reading the comments themselves if possible. At the same = time, I do hope you all know that we try our best to do as thorough and com= prehensive a job as possible, so a combination of our efforts and a WG=92s/= Sub Team=92s eagle eyes is the best arrangement. Basically, we read through all the comments that appeared to address = specific recommendations and/or open questions, and we also read all the on= line template responses that do the same. The Word document is therefore th= e compilation of all of these, tailored to each Sub Team (or the full WG, a= s appropriate). I=92ve taken a quick look through my documents/collected co= mments and don=92t believe I have missed out any others; however, I will do= a more thorough check shortly on all the Word documents I=92ve compiled to= date for all the Sub Teams, just to be sure. On the approach - from the staff perspective, Todd=92s suggested appr= oach seems to make sense, and would align pretty well with what we ourselve= s would probably have suggested. You could start with two smaller groups to= tackle the two categories suggested, based on Todd=92s initial sweep, and = in doing so also note any comments that didn=92t address either =96 so that= they can either be referred to the appropriate Sub Team (if any) or consid= ered by the full WG (if appropriate). BTW, Todd, maybe it=92s my machine or more likely that I haven=92t lo= oked through it in detail, but I=92m not seeing your comments/additions/edi= ts in the document you circulated =85. ? Thanks for kicking things off, and do let me know if you need assista= nce from staff in any way! Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4889 Email: mary.wong@icann.org From: > on behalf of "Williams, Todd" > Date: Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 16:52 To: "gnso-ppsai3@icann.org" > Subject: [Gnso-ppsai3] Thoughts on a work plan Am I the first to try this out? Cool. As I mentioned in my email on Tuesday (attached), I thought that t= he presentation that we had on our last call from the 1.3.2 sub-team was he= lpful to illustrate where we=92ll need to be by 8-11, which in turn might h= elp us decide what we=92ll need to do to get there. Specifically, I though= t it helped that the 1.3.2 sub-team divided their work into two basic quest= ions, and then presented separately on each. I=92d recommend that we do th= e same. Here are the two that I=92d propose: 1) Those comments that rejected the premise of Annex E, and i= nstead argued that P/P Providers can never disclose and/or publish absent a= court order, subpoena, or other legal process authorizing them to do so. = Presumably this group would present on: =B7 How many of these comments were there? =B7 Who did they come from? =B7 What arguments did they make? =B7 What ramifications would these arguments have on other = portions of the Initial Report beyond Annex E? 2) Those comments that accepted the premise of Annex E that P= /P Providers can sometimes disclose and/or publish absent a court order, su= bpoena, or other legal process, but then offered thoughts as to whether and= how the Disclosure Framework outlined in Annex E ought to be modified. Pr= esumably this group would present on: =B7 How many of these comments were there? =B7 Who did they come from? =B7 What arguments did they make? =B7 What potential changes to Annex E could the WG make to = address the arguments raised in these comments? I offer those two buckets for a couple of reasons. First, I think= it will help our sub-team =93divide and conquer=94 the work that we have b= efore us (much like the 1.3.2 sub-team did). Second, I=92m not really sure= how we=92d otherwise substantively reconcile those two buckets of comments= . A comment that argues that P/P Providers should not be allowed to disclo= se and/or publish absent a court order isn=92t arguing for changes to Annex= E; it=92s arguing to scrap Annex E altogether. With those two buckets in mind, I=92ve taken a first pass through = the comments in the Review Tool Word Document that Mary circulated (attache= d). My thoughts below. First, can everybody double-check to make sure tha= t they agree with how I=92ve tentatively divided the comments? Once we=92r= e comfortable with that allocation, then perhaps the next step would be to = divide our sub-team into two (or three, if some members want to tackle the = third =93unclear=94 category) to start reviewing the comments in each bucke= t and then drafting two documents to present to the WG answering the questi= ons outlined above (and any other questions that anybody wants to suggest). Finally, one last question for Staff: can you give us a little bit= of information on the methodology of how the attached Word document was co= mpiled? I=92m just curious because I want to make sure that our sub-team i= s comfortable that what we are reviewing is exhaustive. For example, I kno= w that Turner=92s comment (available here: http://forum.icann.org/lists/com= ments-ppsai-initial-05may15/pdfrXQ3VcnSR7.pdf) had some thoughts on Annex E= . Yet it wasn=92t included in the attached. And I only know that it menti= ons Annex E because I drafted it. :) So I want to make sure that there ar= en=92t other comments on Annex E that we also ought to be reviewing. Thanks. Look forward to working with everybody. Todd. Todd D. Williams Counsel Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. One CNN Center, 10 North Atlanta, Georgia 30303 P: 404-827-2234 F: 404-827-1994 todd.williams@turner.com =B7 Bucket One: rejects the premise of Annex E. 1) Internet Commerce Association (though with carve-out for b= reach of material service terms such as Internet abuse) 2) Google 3) 1&1 Internet SE 4) Access Now 5) Endurance Int=92l Group 6) Jeff Wheelhouse 7) EasyDNS (though with same carve-out as ICA for breach of s= ervice terms such as net abuse) 8) Greg McMullen 9) Evelyn Aya Snow 10) Ralf Haring 11) Liam 12) Dr M Klinefelter 13) Sam 14) Dan M 15) Adrian Valeriu Ispas 16) Not your business 17) Simon Kissane 18) TS 19) Cort Wee 20) Alex Xu 21) Kenneth Godwin 22) Shahed Ahmmed 23) Sebastian Broussier 24) Andrew Merenbach 25) Finn Ellis 26) Aaron Holmes 27) Michael Ekstrand 28) Homer 29) Donuts 30) Michael Ho 31) Key Systems * Bucket Two: accepts the premise of Annex E, but offers thou= ghts on how to change the Disclosure Framework. 1) BC 2) MPAA 3) ISPCP 4) CDT, Open Technology Institute & Public Knowledge 5) INTA 6) IACC 7) NCSG 8) Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas 9) Cyberinvasion 10) Phil Crooker 11) Aaron Myers 12) Cui (ADNDRC) 13) Mike Fewings 14) Name withheld 15) Gary Miller 16) Byunghoon Choi 17) Reid Baker 18) Nick O=92Dell 19) Time Warner 20) RIAA & IFPI 21) IPC 22) Thomas Smoonlock 23) Vanda Scartezini 24) Tim Kramer * Bucket Three: unclear. 1) Sven Slootweg 2) Brendan Conniff 3) Marc Schauber 4) Aaron Mason 5) Kevin Szprychel 6) Christopher 7) James Ford 8) Shantanu Gupta 9) Christopher Smith 10) Private 11) Robert Lukitsh 12) Adam Miller 13) Charles 14) Aaron Dalton 15) Stephen Black Wolf 16) Ian McNeil 17) Adam Creighton 18) Arthur Zonnenberg 19) Anand S. 20) Lucas Stadler 21) Alan _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai3 mailing l= ist Gnso-ppsai3@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org= /mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai3 _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai3 mailing list Gnso-ppsai3@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai3 --_000_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <8548E237BF99754C87DE5CC26DB68367@namprd07.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi everyone,

The compiled template/matrix only contains those comments that directl= y responded to one or more of the WG=92s preliminary recommendations and/or= open questions. It does not (at the moment) contain any content from any o= f the form-based submissions (e.g. the template emails generated by online web campaigns that were sent in th= e thousands). That=92s because the WG has yet to discuss whether and how to= treat these emails =96 although I=92ve suggested to the Sub Teams that to = the extent some of these submissions contain direct and specific comments relevant to the topic, the team may wish to c= onsider recommending whether (or not) to include at least a reference to th= em in the team=92s report. 

This may be something to discuss more fully with the WG as well; I=92ll fla= g it to the chairs. Thanks, Holly!

Cheers
Mary

Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names &= ; Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4889=
Email: mary.wong@icann.org


From: Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net>
Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 01= :57
To: Sara Bockey <sbockey@godaddy.com>
Cc: Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell@endurance.com>= , "Williams, Todd" <Todd.Williams@turner.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, "gnso-ppsai3@icann.org&q= uot; <gnso-ppsai3@icann.org= >
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai3] Thoughts= on a work plan

Folks

I=92m sure I have missed something, but it isn=92t clear to me where t= he list of submitters on Todd=92s list comes from.

The individual submissions on the website (not including survey respon= ses) run to 35 pages, with between 40-50 submissions per page - which is a = lot more than the 76 submissions listed on Todd=92s list (and ALAC isn=92t = included in any of the three baskets) 

The vast majority of individual submissions would fall into either the= no, never, or the only under court order/subpoena/legal requirement, and s= o implicitly would reject Annex E.

So Mary (of Todd or whomever) If you have a list of those submissions = that do not either reject outright any revealing of information at all, or = only do so under some kind of legal order/process, I would be very grateful= .

Thanks

HOlly


On 4 Aug 2015, at 7:41 am, Sara Bockey <sbockey@godaddy.com> wrote:

I can tackle the 31 in Bucket 1.

Sara

From: <gnso-ppsai= 3-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Darcy Southwell
Date: Monday, August 3, 2015 at 12:00 PM
To: "Williams, Todd", Mary Wong, "gnso-ppsai3@icann.org"
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai3] Thoughts on a work plan

Sorry for= my silence on these latest emails and missing last week=92s meeting; I=92m= just returning from vacation with my family and getting caught up on email= .

Todd=92s = proposal for dividing the issues into two questions seems to make sense. &n= bsp;To Holly=92s point, maybe we can be sure to have two distinct categorie= s for =93What arguments did they make?=94:  (1) the no, never = under any circumstances, and (2) the ones that said only with a legal proce= ss (court order. subpoena) and include the stats to give some more color.

I=92ve only skimmed the latest document against Todd=92s categorizatio= ns, but they look fairly accurate at this point.

I can take the 21 in Bucket 3.

Thanks,
Darcy


Thanks Mary.  No, I hadn=92t = made any edits to the document.  Just used it to review as I grouped t= he comments into the three buckets. 
 
Does anybody on the sub-team have = any objection to dividing the work this way?  Or, if not, to my initia= l tentative placement of each of the comments into those three buckets?&nbs= p; I=92m certainly open to any suggestions that a comment that I had read/understood as going in Bucket One should instead= be grouped in Bucket Two, etc.  If not, shall we divide up to start r= eviewing these in more detail so that we can be ready to present by next Tu= esday?  I=92ll go first and am happy to take the 24 comments in Bucket Two (plus Turner=92s, which would make 25).=   Anybody want to join me?  Anybody want to volunteer for the 31 = comments in Bucket One or the 21 in Bucket 3?  Thanks all!<= /span>
 
From: Mary Wong [<= a href=3D"mailto:mary.wong@icann.org" style=3D"color: rgb(149, 79, 114); te= xt-decoration: underline;">mailto:mary.wong@icann.org] 
Sent: Thursday, Ju= ly 30, 2015 6:06 PM
To: Williams, Todd= <Todd.Williams@turner.com>;  Re: [Gnso= -ppsai3] Thoughts on a work plan
 
Hello Todd and everyone,
 
Welcome to the Sub Team 3 (Annex E) mail= ing list!
 
Todd - I think you just found an omissio= n from staff (me), for which I apologize. I definitely had the Turner comme= nt in my compilation of comments and documents, but I think what happened i= s that in formatting the table for the Word document I somehow managed to edit that out. I am very sorry, and= thanks for noting it! This is exactly why staff welcomes WG members=92 que= stions, and why we emphasize that our compilation/edits don=92t replace WG = members=92 reading the comments themselves if possible. At the same time, I do hope you all know that we try our best= to do as thorough and comprehensive a job as possible, so a combination of= our efforts and a WG=92s/Sub Team=92s eagle eyes is the best arrangement.<= o:p>
 
Basically, we read through all the comme= nts that appeared to address specific recommendations and/or open questions= , and we also read all the online template responses that do the same. The = Word document is therefore the compilation of all of these, tailored to each Sub Team (or the full WG, as appropriate= ). I=92ve taken a quick look through my documents/collected comments and do= n=92t believe I have missed out any others; however, I will do a more thoro= ugh check shortly on all the Word documents I=92ve compiled to date for all the Sub Teams, just to be sure.=
 
On the approach - from the staff perspec= tive, Todd=92s suggested approach seems to make sense, and would align pret= ty well with what we ourselves would probably have suggested. You could sta= rt with two smaller groups to tackle the two categories suggested, based on Todd=92s initial sweep, and in doin= g so also note any comments that didn=92t address either =96 so that they c= an either be referred to the appropriate Sub Team (if any) or considered by= the full WG (if appropriate).
 
BTW, Todd, maybe it=92s my machine or mo= re likely that I haven=92t looked through it in detail, but I=92m not seein= g your comments/additions/edits in the document you circulated =85. ?<= /o:p>
 
Thanks for kicking things off, and do le= t me know if you need assistance from staff in any way!
 
Cheers
Mary
 
 
 
 
Am I the first to try this out?  Cool.
 
As I mentioned in my email on Tuesday (attached), I though= t that the presentation that we had on our last call from the 1.3.2 sub-tea= m was helpful to illustrate where we=92ll need to be by 8-11, which in turn= might help us decide what we=92ll need to do to get there.  Specifically, I thought it helped that the 1.3.2= sub-team divided their work into two basic questions, and then presented s= eparately on each.  I=92d recommend that we do the same.  Here ar= e the two that I=92d propose:
 
1)      Those comments that rejected the premise of Annex E, and instead argued that P/P= Providers can never disclose and/or publish absent a court order, subpoena= , or other legal process authorizing them to do so.  Presumably this g= roup would present on:
=B7        How many of these comments were there?
=B7        Who did they come from?
=B7        What arguments did they make?
=B7        What ramifications would these arguments have on other portions of the Initial = Report beyond Annex E?
2)      Those comments that accepted the premise of Annex E that P/P Providers can somet= imes disclose and/or publish absent a court order, subpoena, or other legal= process, but then offered thoughts as to whether and how the Disclosure Fr= amework outlined in Annex E ought to be modified.  Presumably this group would present on:
=B7        How many of these comments were there?
=B7        Who did they come from?
=B7        What arguments did they make?
=B7        What potential changes to Annex E could the WG make to address the arguments ra= ised in these comments?
 
I offer those two buckets for a couple of reasons.  F= irst, I think it will help our sub-team =93divide and conquer=94 the work t= hat we have before us (much like the 1.3.2 sub-team did).  Second, I= =92m not really sure how we=92d otherwise substantively reconcile those two buckets of comments.  A comment that argues that = P/P Providers should not be allowed to disclose and/or publish absent a cou= rt order isn=92t arguing for changes to Annex E; it=92s arguing to scrap An= nex E altogether.       
 
With those two buckets in mind, I=92ve taken a first pass = through the comments in the Review Tool Word Document that Mary circulated = (attached).  My thoughts below.  First, can everybody double-chec= k to make sure that they agree with how I=92ve tentatively divided the comments?  Once we=92re comfortable with that allocation,= then perhaps the next step would be to divide our sub-team into two (or th= ree, if some members want to tackle the third =93unclear=94 category) to st= art reviewing the comments in each bucket and then drafting two documents to present to the WG answering the questions o= utlined above (and any other questions that anybody wants to suggest).=
 
Finally, one last question for Staff: can you give us a li= ttle bit of information on the methodology of how the attached Word documen= t was compiled?  I=92m just curious because I want to make sure that o= ur sub-team is comfortable that what we are reviewing is exhaustive.  For example, I know that Turner=92s comment= (available here: htt= p://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-ppsai-initial-05may15/pdfrXQ3VcnSR7.pdf<= /a>) had some thoughts on Annex E.  Yet it wasn=92t included in the attach= ed.  And I only know that it mentions Annex E because I drafted it.&nb= sp; J  So I want to make sure that there aren=92t other comments on Annex E that we also ou= ght to be reviewing.
 
Thanks.  Look forward to working with everybody.=

Todd.    
 
Todd D. Williams
Counsel
Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.
One CNN Center, 10 North
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
P: 404-827-2234
F: 404-827-1994=
 
=B7        Bucket One: rejects the premise of Annex E.
1)      Internet Commerce Association (though with carve-out for breach of material service= terms such as Internet abuse)
2)      Google
3)      1&1 Internet SE
4)      Access Now
5)      Enduranc= e Int=92l Group
6)      Jeff Wheelhouse
7)      EasyDNS (though with same carve-out as ICA for breach of service terms such as net= abuse)
8)      Greg McMullen
9)      Evelyn Aya Snow
10)  &= nbsp;Ralf Haring
11)  &= nbsp;Liam
12)  &= nbsp;Dr M Klinefelter
13)  &= nbsp;Sam
14)  &= nbsp;Dan M
15)  &= nbsp;Adrian Valeriu Ispas
16)  &= nbsp;Not your business
17)  &= nbsp;Simon Kissane
18)  &= nbsp;TS
19)  &= nbsp;Cort Wee
20)  &= nbsp;Alex Xu
21)  &= nbsp;Kenneth Godwin
22)  &= nbsp;Shahed Ahmmed
23)  &= nbsp;Sebastian Broussier
24)  &= nbsp;Andrew Merenbach
25)  &= nbsp;Finn Ellis
26)  &= nbsp;Aaron Holmes
27)  &= nbsp;Michael Ekstrand
28)  &= nbsp;Homer
29)  &= nbsp;Donuts<= /div>
30)  &= nbsp;Michael Ho
31)  &= nbsp;Key Systems
  • Bucket Two: accepts the premise of Annex E, but offers thoughts on how to c= hange the Disclosure Framework.
1)      BC<= /o:p>
2)      MPAA
3)      ISPCP
4)      CDT, Open Technology Institute & Public Knowledge
5)      INTA
6)      IACC
7)      NCSG
8)      Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas
9)      Cyberinv= asion
10)  &= nbsp;Phil Crooker
11)  &= nbsp;Aaron Myers
12)  &= nbsp;Cui (ADNDRC)
13)  &= nbsp;Mike Fewings
14)  &= nbsp;Name withheld
15)  &= nbsp;Gary Miller
16)  &= nbsp;Byunghoon Choi
17)  &= nbsp;Reid Baker
18)  &= nbsp;Nick O=92Dell
19)  &= nbsp;Time Warner
20)  &= nbsp;RIAA & IFPI
21)  &= nbsp;IPC
22)  &= nbsp;Thomas Smoonlock
23)  &= nbsp;Vanda Scartezini
24)  &= nbsp;Tim Kramer
  • Bucket Three: unclear.
1)      Sven Slootweg
2)      Brendan Conniff
3)      Marc Schauber
4)      Aaron Mason
5)      Kevin Szprychel
6)      Christop= her
7)      James Ford
8)      Shantanu Gupta
9)      Christop= her Smith
10)  &= nbsp;Private=
11)  &= nbsp;Robert Lukitsh
12)  &= nbsp;Adam Miller
13)  &= nbsp;Charles=
14)  &= nbsp;Aaron Dalton
15)  &= nbsp;Stephen Black Wolf
16)  &= nbsp;Ian McNeil
17)  &= nbsp;Adam Creighton
18)  &= nbsp;Arthur Zonnenberg
19)  &= nbsp;Anand S.
20)  &= nbsp;Lucas Stadler
21)  &= nbsp;Alan
_______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai3 mailing list Gnso-ppsai3@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai3
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ppsai3 mailing list
Gnso-ppsai3@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mai= lman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai3

 --_000_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_-- --_005_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_ Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Description: smime.p7s Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"; size=5044; creation-date="Tue, 04 Aug 2015 13:13:52 GMT"; modification-date="Tue, 04 Aug 2015 13:13:52 GMT" Content-ID: <1698118DFEEA6C46B009A6D507EC9936@namprd07.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIITsAYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIToTCCE50CAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMAsGCSqGSIb3DQEHAaCCEXww ggbsMIIF1KADAgECAhADKvABf1hiJDv2CqIkYCGyMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGIxCzAJBgNVBAYT AlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20xITAf BgNVBAMTGERpZ2lDZXJ0IEFzc3VyZWQgSUQgQ0EtMTAeFw0xMzA2MTMwMDAwMDBaFw0xNjA2MTIx MjAwMDBaMIGbMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzETMBEGA1UECBMKQ2FsaWZvcm5pYTEUMBIGA1UEBxMLTG9z IEFuZ2VsZXMxPDA6BgNVBAoTM0ludGVybmV0IENvcnBvcmF0aW9uIGZvciBBc3NpZ25lZCBOYW1l cyBhbmQgTnVtYmVyczEPMA0GA1UECxMGUG9saWN5MRIwEAYDVQQDEwlNYXJ5IFdvbmcwggEiMA0G CSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDMF2ZZOoFY8jwMtyTPKD/JtTduMCfV2PPWDWVKvxd7 RRC+ToZhg2ZUiPp2PM+E4WUCX/bixYGjSAmpN895nuLBKRWDYUrgPC8yi1chVftjKlY5jXtjFhxC w0gQsODTgJPxzw/4HCRkzutSc1nHMI8P2SDOMhY9r15u/AZuoNDm2MYeymsURC7At2DMaRu8AUak 0FDpZo4T0ixFaPbKHkhwhylUKCAz5nuPy3L3AB8GkQqkIN5OgUdx2ykK3ql/IPhQ4fuU17TI2Cpa FG7KQZJM8CArxoMrAIDE2ZFZR0mlopKCFq4AUUMYgvz/kxn3WtOUF8rPAmoay2p05NH870cpAgMB AAGjggNiMIIDXjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQVABIrE5iymQftHt+ivlcNK2cCzTAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUhct1 id0ccoJabghWMDc67I0KtOUwHgYDVR0RBBcwFYETbWFyeS53b25nQGljYW5uLm9yZzAOBgNVHQ8B Af8EBAMCBaAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwQGCCsGAQUFBwMCMH0GA1UdHwR2MHQwOKA2oDSG Mmh0dHA6Ly9jcmwzLmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9EaWdpQ2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRENBLTEuY3JsMDigNqA0 hjJodHRwOi8vY3JsNC5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vRGlnaUNlcnRBc3N1cmVkSURDQS0xLmNybDCCAcUG A1UdIASCAbwwggG4MIIBtAYKYIZIAYb9bAQBAjCCAaQwOgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWLmh0dHA6Ly93d3cu ZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL3NzbC1jcHMtcmVwb3NpdG9yeS5odG0wggFkBggrBgEFBQcCAjCCAVYeggFS AEEAbgB5ACAAdQBzAGUAIABvAGYAIAB0AGgAaQBzACAAQwBlAHIAdABpAGYAaQBjAGEAdABlACAA YwBvAG4AcwB0AGkAdAB1AHQAZQBzACAAYQBjAGMAZQBwAHQAYQBuAGMAZQAgAG8AZgAgAHQAaABl ACAARABpAGcAaQBDAGUAcgB0ACAAQwBQAC8AQwBQAFMAIABhAG4AZAAgAHQAaABlACAAUgBlAGwA eQBpAG4AZwAgAFAAYQByAHQAeQAgAEEAZwByAGUAZQBtAGUAbgB0ACAAdwBoAGkAYwBoACAAbABp AG0AaQB0ACAAbABpAGEAYgBpAGwAaQB0AHkAIABhAG4AZAAgAGEAcgBlACAAaQBuAGMAbwByAHAA bwByAGEAdABlAGQAIABoAGUAcgBlAGkAbgAgAGIAeQAgAHIAZQBmAGUAcgBlAG4AYwBlAC4wdwYI KwYBBQUHAQEEazBpMCQGCCsGAQUFBzABhhhodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20wQQYIKwYB BQUHMAKGNWh0dHA6Ly9jYWNlcnRzLmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9EaWdpQ2VydEFzc3VyZWRJRENBLTEu Y3J0MAwGA1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAETTOkULkHtPP52qF7xcofUPxkd3 K6vP6espIH/rMI6CO1/5BEMn6BKIRH/qH6RkGukwzIkhHqP6U431rtOHkB7REgZc7OItVBE5b8dd ufCcIXC1dgjyuzm2XCgTLe3Jo1jJgiRCJNFy54UorBDtEjd7kEZg6p/W2ZszCuSa96QQqA+F7iFo 8aZ3k4eNExvOmSw3SG5LL0tJrqqW4Y4/Z1fZnWyNA4fw/81laVUSK2SeBo/P0mGlREYbt5JDn8CQ 5KY2gtRkZWxJXXOmjhdY7PI1ld1esy7Lmsy0Ehhb3anlWlbFHnGXbNQGxcpoQ8NAwqeJdhykJE5U cZ9SstjbHNwwggbNMIIFtaADAgECAhAG/fkDlgOt6gAK6z8nu7obMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGUx CzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2Vy dC5jb20xJDAiBgNVBAMTG0RpZ2lDZXJ0IEFzc3VyZWQgSUQgUm9vdCBDQTAeFw0wNjExMTAwMDAw MDBaFw0yMTExMTAwMDAwMDBaMGIxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMx GTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20xITAfBgNVBAMTGERpZ2lDZXJ0IEFzc3VyZWQgSUQg Q0EtMTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAOiCLZn5ysJClaWAc0Bw0p5WVFyp xNJBBo/JM/xNRZFcgZ/tLJz4FlnfnrUkFcKYubR3SdyJxArar8tea+2tsHEx6886QAxGTZPsi3o2 CAOrDDT+GEmC/sfHMUiAfB6iD5IOUMnGh+s2P9gww/+m9/uizW9zI/6sVgWQ8DIhFonGcIj5BZd9 o8dD3QLoOz3tsUGj7T++25VIxO4es/K8DCuZ0MZdEkKB4YNugnM/JksUkK5ZZgrEjb7SzgaurYRv SISbT0C58Uzyr5j79s5AXVz2qPEvr+yJIvJrGGWxwXOt1/HYzx4KdFxCuGh+t9V3CidWfA9ipD8y FGCV/QcEogkCAwEAAaOCA3owggN2MA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIBhjA7BgNVHSUENDAyBggrBgEFBQcD AQYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMDBggrBgEFBQcDBAYIKwYBBQUHAwgwggHSBgNVHSAEggHJMIIB xTCCAbQGCmCGSAGG/WwAAQQwggGkMDoGCCsGAQUFBwIBFi5odHRwOi8vd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNv bS9zc2wtY3BzLXJlcG9zaXRvcnkuaHRtMIIBZAYIKwYBBQUHAgIwggFWHoIBUgBBAG4AeQAgAHUA cwBlACAAbwBmACAAdABoAGkAcwAgAEMAZQByAHQAaQBmAGkAYwBhAHQAZQAgAGMAbwBuAHMAdABp AHQAdQB0AGUAcwAgAGEAYwBjAGUAcAB0AGEAbgBjAGUAIABvAGYAIAB0AGgAZQAgAEQAaQBnAGkA QwBlAHIAdAAgAEMAUAAvAEMAUABTACAAYQBuAGQAIAB0AGgAZQAgAFIAZQBsAHkAaQBuAGcAIABQ AGEAcgB0AHkAIABBAGcAcgBlAGUAbQBlAG4AdAAgAHcAaABpAGMAaAAgAGwAaQBtAGkAdAAgAGwA aQBhAGIAaQBsAGkAdAB5ACAAYQBuAGQAIABhAHIAZQAgAGkAbgBjAG8AcgBwAG8AcgBhAHQAZQBk ACAAaABlAHIAZQBpAG4AIABiAHkAIAByAGUAZgBlAHIAZQBuAGMAZQAuMAsGCWCGSAGG/WwDFTAS BgNVHRMBAf8ECDAGAQH/AgEAMHkGCCsGAQUFBwEBBG0wazAkBggrBgEFBQcwAYYYaHR0cDovL29j c3AuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tMEMGCCsGAQUFBzAChjdodHRwOi8vY2FjZXJ0cy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20v RGlnaUNlcnRBc3N1cmVkSURSb290Q0EuY3J0MIGBBgNVHR8EejB4MDqgOKA2hjRodHRwOi8vY3Js My5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vRGlnaUNlcnRBc3N1cmVkSURSb290Q0EuY3JsMDqgOKA2hjRodHRwOi8v Y3JsNC5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vRGlnaUNlcnRBc3N1cmVkSURSb290Q0EuY3JsMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQV ABIrE5iymQftHt+ivlcNK2cCzTAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRF66Kv9JLLgjEtUYunpyGd823IDzANBgkq hkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEARlA+ybcoJKc4HbZbKa9Sz1LpMUerVlx71Q0LQbPv7HUfdDjyslxhopyV w1Dkgrkj0bo6hnKtOHisdV0XFzRyR4WUVtHruzaEd8wkpfMEGVWp5+Pnq2LN+4stkMLA0rWUvV5P sQXSDj0aqRRbpoYxYqioM+SbOafE9c4deHaUJXPkKqvPnHZL7V/CSxbkS3BMAIke/MV5vEwSV/5f 4R68Al2o/vsHOE8Nxl2RuQ9nRc3Wg+3nkg2NsWmMT/tZ4CMP0qquAHzunEIOz5HXJ7cW7g/DvXwK oO4sCFWFIrjrGBpN/CohrUkxg0eVd3HcsRtLSxwQnHcUwZ1PL1qVCCkQJjCCA7cwggKfoAMCAQIC EAzn4OUX2Eb+j+Vg/BvwMDkwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoT DERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNl cnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBSb290IENBMB4XDTA2MTExMDAwMDAwMFoXDTMxMTExMDAwMDAwMFowZTEL MAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0 LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBSb290IENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0B AQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEArQ4VzuRDgFyxh/O3YPlxEqWu3CaUiKr0zvUgOShYYAz4gNqpFZUy YTy1sSiEiorcnwoMgxd6j5Csiud5U1wxhCr2D5gyNnbM3t08qKLvavsh8lJh358g1x/isdn+GGTS Eltf+VgYNbxHzaE2+Wt/1LA4PsEbw4wz2dgvGP4oD7Ong9bDbkTAYTWWFv5ZnIt2bdfxoksNK/8L ctqeYNCOkDXGeFWHIKHP5W0KyEl8MZgzbCLph9AyWqK6E4IR7TkXnZk6cqHm+qTZ1Rcxda6FfSKu PwFGhvYoecix2uRXF8R+HA6wtJKmVrO9spftqqfwt8WoP5UW0P+hlusIXxh3TwIDAQABo2MwYTAO BgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAYYwDwYDVR0TAQH/BAUwAwEB/zAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUReuir/SSy4IxLVGLp6ch nfNtyA8wHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUReuir/SSy4IxLVGLp6chnfNtyA8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEB AKIOvN/i7fDjcnN6ZJS/93Jm2DLkQnVirofr8tXZ3lazn8zOFCi5DZdgXBJMWOTTPYNJRViXNWka qEfqVsZ5qxLYZ4GE338JPJTmuCYsIL09syiJ91//IuKXhB/pZe+H4N/BZ0mzXeuyCSrrJu14vn0/ K/O3JjVtX4kBtklbnwEFm6s9JcHMtn/C8W+GxvpkaOuBLZTrQrf6jB7dYvG+UGe3bL3z8R9rDDYH Fn83fKlbbXrxEkZgg9cnBL5Lzpe+w2cqaBHfgOcMM2a/Ew0UbvN/H2MQHvqNGyVtbI+lt2EBsdKj JqEQcZ2t4sP5w5lRtysHCM4u5lCyp/oKRS+i8PIxggH8MIIB+AIBATB2MGIxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVT MRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20xITAfBgNV BAMTGERpZ2lDZXJ0IEFzc3VyZWQgSUQgQ0EtMQIQAyrwAX9YYiQ79gqiJGAhsjAJBgUrDgMCGgUA oF0wIwYJKoZIhvcNAQkEMRYEFFqFK2+3KIYxwyorJ66JHsOixMecMBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkq hkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTE1MDgwNDEzMTIzMlowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEA Cr5qCSS/ezNzLDF0YRHDZFD7PtVAgDsgRyzskuwLICPdiHJIuyuasu+FZMWLzwEBRuLb4Bx5fQNb q2PUuyC7ZgENCm/JVhSG93altYtieXveETdsIMQHEtIY8E0oBSQvvG3gfvyJz7F64FLcGLnWUSum 6DZQ1DuT9xtt+1yDPUuUwbI0Ae65m7XvG9SuT2uOBDr8Y6N1KfBRB9CSj2fRgGvL1mTISKaqZxI8 he4rFc4dvej8yZ2KR4CnnDJI2Et+0zuriUMTvnXqn5vWqsmk7lhXlojwS8h8wfjx46fzVPqnI0GK CEQiK2hxBSIlcH8QtFdIoVfXP9lHWMPxTv4lIw== --_005_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_ Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT00001.txt" Content-Description: ATT00001.txt Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT00001.txt"; size=147; creation-date="Tue, 04 Aug 2015 13:13:52 GMT"; modification-date="Tue, 04 Aug 2015 13:13:52 GMT" Content-ID: <4DC8584B03F37046AD0BA77FD004E164@namprd07.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCkduc28tcHBz YWkzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KR25zby1wcHNhaTNAaWNhbm4ub3JnDQpodHRwczovL21tLmljYW5u Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2duc28tcHBzYWkz --_005_D1E63153168EEmarywongicannorg_--