Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft forDT Review
Chuck the document looks good with the three points in there…..however, just a note compliance can only be reached when you audited against set rules. Compliance is going to be a large chunk of ICANN. I am also tempted to say despite ICANN’s fiscal or financial issues. If a registrar or registry to not comply they should be put on a probation time and within that time if they do not comply there escrow money is taken up by ICANN. An idea to ponder on because it becomes too easy. This is not policing but acting hard so as not to get more of ICANN in trouble because i can imagine the answers from those not complying. Kris
On Mar 3, 2018, at 00:13, Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:
<https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>) Add cleanup rule <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%...> | More info <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=37163560904&...> Thanks for the edits Steve.
I saved the redline version from Steve as version 2 of our deliverable. Does anyone have any more suggested edits? If so, please let us know by mid-day on Monday. Otherwise, I will assume that this is our final version for ICANN Contractual Compliance.
Who from this DT is going to be in Puerto Rico? It would be great if one of you could present our deliverable to the WG on Saturday morning. It could also be presented remotely.
Chuck
From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com>] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 9:04 AM To: 'Beth Bacon' <bbacon@pir.org <mailto:bbacon@pir.org>>; 'Chuck' <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>>; 'GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org>' <GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
And here are a few edits re the ICANN contractual compliance piece, mainly to indicate that (1) compliance issues other than RDS compliance might apply and (2) ICANN compliance may need to contact registrants as part of a compliance investigation. Perhaps we should run this document by ICANN compliance to get their perspective….
Steve
<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
From: Metalitz, Steven Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:46 AM To: 'Beth Bacon'; Chuck; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
Thanks for getting the ball rolling Beth. See my edits/comments in attached.
<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Beth Bacon Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:22 AM To: Chuck; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
Hello Team, Please see my edits and comments in the attached. Please feel free to argue with me about my comments and questions. I’ve missed a few of the calls this month so my questions may be based on incorrect assumptions. I don’t have any edits to the compliance document.
Looking forward to seeing you in PR. Best, Beth
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:00 AM To: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High
I have only heard from one team member so far and she plans to respond today. I sure hope the rest of you can respond today as well. I understand how much is going on including ICANN’s posting of the latest info on the GDPR memo, but please try to spend 30 minutes or so today and provide your initial input on these two documents so that we can have an email discussion about them over the weekend and on Monday.
Chuck
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2018 9:01 AM To: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High
It would be very helpful if each of you could review and provide any first thoughts you have on the following two drafts TODAY. Note that the first one is less than two pages and the second is only about half a page.
Chuck <Drafting Team Output from DT5 re the ICANN Contractual Enforcement Purpose - v2.docx>_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>
Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/> "Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"
Kris, Note that the WG is not tasked with developing policy for compliance. Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 10:42 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft forDT Review Importance: High Chuck the document looks good with the three points in there…..however, just a note compliance can only be reached when you audited against set rules. Compliance is going to be a large chunk of ICANN. I am also tempted to say despite ICANN’s fiscal or financial issues. If a registrar or registry to not comply they should be put on a probation time and within that time if they do not comply there escrow money is taken up by ICANN. An idea to ponder on because it becomes too easy. This is not policing but acting hard so as not to get more of ICANN in trouble because i can imagine the answers from those not complying. Kris On Mar 3, 2018, at 00:13, Chuck <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > wrote: <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> <http://www.boxbe.com/stfopen?tc_serial=37163560904&tc_rand=2132157676&utm_so...> This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! ( <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> consult@cgomes.com) <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%...> Add cleanup rule | <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=37163560904&...> More info Thanks for the edits Steve. I saved the redline version from Steve as version 2 of our deliverable. Does anyone have any more suggested edits? If so, please let us know by mid-day on Monday. Otherwise, I will assume that this is our final version for ICANN Contractual Compliance. Who from this DT is going to be in Puerto Rico? It would be great if one of you could present our deliverable to the WG on Saturday morning. It could also be presented remotely. Chuck From: Metalitz, Steven [ <mailto:met@msk.com> mailto:met@msk.com] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 9:04 AM To: 'Beth Bacon' < <mailto:bbacon@pir.org> bbacon@pir.org>; 'Chuck' < <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> consult@cgomes.com>; ' <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org' < <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review And here are a few edits re the ICANN contractual compliance piece, mainly to indicate that (1) compliance issues other than RDS compliance might apply and (2) ICANN compliance may need to contact registrants as part of a compliance investigation. Perhaps we should run this document by ICANN compliance to get their perspective…. Steve <image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | <mailto:met@msk.com> met@msk.com Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | <http://www.msk.com/> www.msk.com 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. From: Metalitz, Steven Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:46 AM To: 'Beth Bacon'; Chuck; <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Thanks for getting the ball rolling Beth. See my edits/comments in attached. <image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | <mailto:met@msk.com> met@msk.com Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | <http://www.msk.com/> www.msk.com 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [ <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Beth Bacon Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:22 AM To: Chuck; <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Hello Team, Please see my edits and comments in the attached. Please feel free to argue with me about my comments and questions. I’ve missed a few of the calls this month so my questions may be based on incorrect assumptions. I don’t have any edits to the compliance document. Looking forward to seeing you in PR. Best, Beth From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [ <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:00 AM To: <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High I have only heard from one team member so far and she plans to respond today. I sure hope the rest of you can respond today as well. I understand how much is going on including ICANN’s posting of the latest info on the GDPR memo, but please try to spend 30 minutes or so today and provide your initial input on these two documents so that we can have an email discussion about them over the weekend and on Monday. Chuck From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [ <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2018 9:01 AM To: <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High It would be very helpful if each of you could review and provide any first thoughts you have on the following two drafts TODAY. Note that the first one is less than two pages and the second is only about half a page. Chuck <Drafting Team Output from DT5 re the ICANN Contractual Enforcement Purpose - v2.docx>_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com> * www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/> "Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"
I know it was a note to the group just fyi. There were so many fights on compliance and being audited etc., so it might be important to keep at the back of the mind.
On Mar 3, 2018, at 17:46, Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:
Kris,
Note that the WG is not tasked with developing policy for compliance.
Chuck
From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com>] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 10:42 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft forDT Review Importance: High
Chuck the document looks good with the three points in there…..however, just a note compliance can only be reached when you audited against set rules. Compliance is going to be a large chunk of ICANN. I am also tempted to say despite ICANN’s fiscal or financial issues. If a registrar or registry to not comply they should be put on a probation time and within that time if they do not comply there escrow money is taken up by ICANN. An idea to ponder on because it becomes too easy. This is not policing but acting hard so as not to get more of ICANN in trouble because i can imagine the answers from those not complying.
Kris
On Mar 3, 2018, at 00:13, Chuck <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> wrote:
<https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>) Add cleanup rule <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%...> | More info <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=37163560904&...> Thanks for the edits Steve.
I saved the redline version from Steve as version 2 of our deliverable. Does anyone have any more suggested edits? If so, please let us know by mid-day on Monday. Otherwise, I will assume that this is our final version for ICANN Contractual Compliance.
Who from this DT is going to be in Puerto Rico? It would be great if one of you could present our deliverable to the WG on Saturday morning. It could also be presented remotely.
Chuck
From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com>] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 9:04 AM To: 'Beth Bacon' <bbacon@pir.org <mailto:bbacon@pir.org>>; 'Chuck' <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>>; 'GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org>' <GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
And here are a few edits re the ICANN contractual compliance piece, mainly to indicate that (1) compliance issues other than RDS compliance might apply and (2) ICANN compliance may need to contact registrants as part of a compliance investigation. Perhaps we should run this document by ICANN compliance to get their perspective….
Steve
<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
From: Metalitz, Steven Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:46 AM To: 'Beth Bacon'; Chuck; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
Thanks for getting the ball rolling Beth. See my edits/comments in attached.
<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Beth Bacon Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:22 AM To: Chuck; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
Hello Team, Please see my edits and comments in the attached. Please feel free to argue with me about my comments and questions. I’ve missed a few of the calls this month so my questions may be based on incorrect assumptions. I don’t have any edits to the compliance document.
Looking forward to seeing you in PR. Best, Beth
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:00 AM To: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High
I have only heard from one team member so far and she plans to respond today. I sure hope the rest of you can respond today as well. I understand how much is going on including ICANN’s posting of the latest info on the GDPR memo, but please try to spend 30 minutes or so today and provide your initial input on these two documents so that we can have an email discussion about them over the weekend and on Monday.
Chuck
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2018 9:01 AM To: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High
It would be very helpful if each of you could review and provide any first thoughts you have on the following two drafts TODAY. Note that the first one is less than two pages and the second is only about half a page.
Chuck <Drafting Team Output from DT5 re the ICANN Contractual Enforcement Purpose - v2.docx>_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>
Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com> www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>
"Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"
<image001.gif>
Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/> "Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"
Last thing is am not going to be in Puerto Rico. I have to plan meeting and report for Supreme Audit Institutions on IT Audit and GDPR in Sydney won’t make it,
On Mar 3, 2018, at 17:46, Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:
Kris,
Note that the WG is not tasked with developing policy for compliance.
Chuck
From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 10:42 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft forDT Review Importance: High
Chuck the document looks good with the three points in there…..however, just a note compliance can only be reached when you audited against set rules. Compliance is going to be a large chunk of ICANN. I am also tempted to say despite ICANN’s fiscal or financial issues. If a registrar or registry to not comply they should be put on a probation time and within that time if they do not comply there escrow money is taken up by ICANN. An idea to ponder on because it becomes too easy. This is not policing but acting hard so as not to get more of ICANN in trouble because i can imagine the answers from those not complying.
Kris
On Mar 3, 2018, at 00:13, Chuck <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> wrote:
<https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>) Add cleanup rule <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%...> | More info <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=37163560904&...> Thanks for the edits Steve.
I saved the redline version from Steve as version 2 of our deliverable. Does anyone have any more suggested edits? If so, please let us know by mid-day on Monday. Otherwise, I will assume that this is our final version for ICANN Contractual Compliance.
Who from this DT is going to be in Puerto Rico? It would be great if one of you could present our deliverable to the WG on Saturday morning. It could also be presented remotely.
Chuck
From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com>] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 9:04 AM To: 'Beth Bacon' <bbacon@pir.org <mailto:bbacon@pir.org>>; 'Chuck' <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>>; 'GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org>' <GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
And here are a few edits re the ICANN contractual compliance piece, mainly to indicate that (1) compliance issues other than RDS compliance might apply and (2) ICANN compliance may need to contact registrants as part of a compliance investigation. Perhaps we should run this document by ICANN compliance to get their perspective….
Steve
<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
From: Metalitz, Steven Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:46 AM To: 'Beth Bacon'; Chuck; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
Thanks for getting the ball rolling Beth. See my edits/comments in attached.
<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Beth Bacon Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:22 AM To: Chuck; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review
Hello Team, Please see my edits and comments in the attached. Please feel free to argue with me about my comments and questions. I’ve missed a few of the calls this month so my questions may be based on incorrect assumptions. I don’t have any edits to the compliance document.
Looking forward to seeing you in PR. Best, Beth
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 11:00 AM To: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] FW: DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High
I have only heard from one team member so far and she plans to respond today. I sure hope the rest of you can respond today as well. I understand how much is going on including ICANN’s posting of the latest info on the GDPR memo, but please try to spend 30 minutes or so today and provide your initial input on these two documents so that we can have an email discussion about them over the weekend and on Monday.
Chuck
From: Gnso-rds-pdp-5 [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2018 9:01 AM To: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Answers to Questions - First Draft for DT Review Importance: High
It would be very helpful if each of you could review and provide any first thoughts you have on the following two drafts TODAY. Note that the first one is less than two pages and the second is only about half a page.
Chuck <Drafting Team Output from DT5 re the ICANN Contractual Enforcement Purpose - v2.docx>_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>
Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com> www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>
"Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"
<image001.gif>
Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/> "Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"
participants (2)
-
Chuck -
Kris Seeburn