April 2014 - lac-discuss-en

Re: [lac-discuss-en] CROPP Program
by asoto＠ibero-americano.org April 4, 2014

April 4, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: CROPP Program From: asoto(a)ibero-americano.org Thanks Ada. Today at last time I was asked to make changes, and return to the first project to present. Now stay as: travel two Puerto Prncipe people dictate seminars, then travel to Santo Sunday, dictate seminars and return. Also cover both countries. S, for Bolivia keep it as is It was planned. Best Regards Alberto Soto From: Aida Noblia [mailto: aidanoblia(a)gmail.com] Posted on: Thursday, April 3, 2014 11:13 pm To: Carlos Vera Quintana CC: Alberto Soto; ICANN At-Large Staff; LACRALO Espaol Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-es] CROPP Program Good News! Thanks Alberto, great activity! Regards On April 3, 2014, 1:16, Carlos Vera Quintana <cveraq(a)gmail.com <mailto:cveraq@gmail.com> > Wrote: Excellent proposal and action congratulations and thanks Carlos Vera Quintana 0988141143 Sgueme @ cveraq > El 02/04/2014, a las 23:02, "Alberto Soto" <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org > > Estimados, como ya habrán visto hace tiempo en la lista, estaba > en dos países (HAITI y REPUBLICA DOMINICANA), para realizar reuniones en > respectivas capitales, a fin de tratar de obtener organizaciones que > certificar como ALS. También por otro mail solicité si alguien dominaba > francés, y lo conseguimos. > > > > Luego de muchas coordinaciones, hemos presentado los dos proyectos y > entregados a Dev Anand Teelucksingh el jueves 27 de marzo, y quedamos en > espera de respuesta. > > Hemos realizado un esfuerzo importante, coordinando con representantes de > ambos países, y logrado de los sponsors locales un gran entusiasmo por > tratar de dejar de ser un país que no tenga una organización que > a los usuarios finales de Internet. En Haití hay dos organizaciones > involucradas y están procurando incorporar a más, y en República > ya hay tres, dos institutos educativos de nivel superior y uno > gubernamental. Todo esto de acuerdo con el modelo de múltiples partes > interesadas. > > > > A su vez, para los primeros días de mayo (7, 8 y 9) he sido invitado a > dictar una conferencia magistral y un taller en el CONGRESO > DE INGENIERIA DE SISTEMAS E INFORMATICA y las JORNADAS NACIONALES DEN > COMPUTING, en Cochabamba, BOLIVIA. En este caso, pese a que los > organizadores no pueden costear lo necesario para mi presencia, y no hay > tiempo para hacer una solicitud en el programa CROPP, asumiré los costos > involucrados. Allí por la importancia del tema, han incluido una tercera > participación mía, y daré un seminario, similar a los que se dictarán en > PUERTO PRÍNCIPE , HAITÍ, Y SANTO DOMINGO, REPÚBLICA DOMINICANA. > > > > Los seminarios se denominarán: El rol de los usuarios en la Gobernanza de > Internet > > > > Y el temario a desarrollar será el siguiente: > > > > - Gobernanza de Internet > > - ICANN: Misión, visión, Ecosistema de Internet > > - Organizaciones At-Large: Su participación en las distintas > regiones geográficas de ICANN. Región Latinoamérica y Caribe (LACRALO) > > - Como involucrase como organización At-Large > > > > Solo esperamos la aprobación de los proyectos en el programa CROPP. > > > > Saludos cordiales > > > > Alberto Soto > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/0778829c72.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] CROPP Program
by aidanoblia＠gmail.com April 4, 2014

April 4, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: CROPP Program From: aidanoblia(a)gmail.com Good News! Thanks Alberto, great activity! Regards On April 3, 2014, 1:16, Carlos Vera Quintana <cveraq(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Excelente propuesta y acción felicitaciones y gracias > > Carlos Vera Quintana > 0988141143 > Sígueme @cveraq > > > El 02/04/2014, a las 23:02, "Alberto Soto" <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> > escribió: > > > > Estimados, como ya habrán visto hace tiempo en la lista, estaba > coordinando > > en dos países (HAITI y REPUBLICA DOMINICANA), para realizar reuniones en > las > > respectivas capitales, a fin de tratar de obtener organizaciones que > puedan > > certificar como ALS. También por otro mail solicité si alguien dominaba > el > > francés, y lo conseguimos. > > > > > > > > Luego de muchas coordinaciones, hemos presentado los dos proyectos y > > entregados a Dev Anand Teelucksingh el jueves 27 de marzo, y quedamos en > > espera de respuesta. > > > > Hemos realizado un esfuerzo importante, coordinando con representantes de > > ambos países, y logrado de los sponsors locales un gran entusiasmo por > > tratar de dejar de ser un país que no tenga una organización que > represente > > a los usuarios finales de Internet. En Haití hay dos organizaciones > > involucradas y están procurando incorporar a más, y en República > Dominicana > > ya hay tres, dos institutos educativos de nivel superior y uno > > gubernamental. Todo esto de acuerdo con el modelo de múltiples partes > > interesadas. > > > > > > > > A su vez, para los primeros días de mayo (7, 8 y 9) he sido invitado a > > dictar una conferencia magistral y un taller en el CONGRESO > LATINOAMERICANO > > DE INGENIERIA DE SISTEMAS E INFORMATICA y las JORNADAS NACIONALES DEN > CLOUD > > COMPUTING, en Cochabamba, BOLIVIA. En este caso, pese a que los > > organizadores no pueden costear lo necesario para mi presencia, y no hay > > tiempo para hacer una solicitud en el programa CROPP, asumiré los costos > > involucrados. Allí por la importancia del tema, han incluido una tercera > > participación mía, y daré un seminario, similar a los que se dictarán en > > PUERTO PRÍNCIPE , HAITÍ, Y SANTO DOMINGO, REPÚBLICA DOMINICANA. > > > > > > > > Los seminarios se denominarán:" El rol de los usuarios en la Gobernanza > de > > Internet" > > > > > > > > Y el temario a desarrollar será el siguiente: > > > > > > > > - Gobernanza de Internet > > > > - ICANN: Misión, visión, Ecosistema de Internet > > > > - Organizaciones At-Large: Su participación en las distintas > > regiones geográficas de ICANN. Región Latinoamérica y Caribe (LACRALO) > > > > - Como involucrase como organización At-Large > > > > > > > > Solo esperamos la aprobación de los proyectos en el programa CROPP. > > > > > > > > Saludos cordiales > > > > > > > > Alberto Soto > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lac-discuss-es mailing list > > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > > > http://www.lacralo.org > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > Aida Noblia _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/523fa85e1b.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] RV: ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention
by aidanoblia＠gmail.com April 4, 2014

April 4, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: RV: ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention From: aidanoblia(a)gmail.com Thanks Alberto, was hesitant to post this because no clear tena term. I'm glad it can be useful to the community Greetings to all On April 3, 2014, 20:55, Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> wrote: > Impecable Aída. El plazo que yo había dicho era para poder discutir en la > lista, pero hasta este momento solo hubo tres comentarios. El plazo de los > comentarios públicos estará abierto hasta las 23:59 UTC del 21 de Abril. > > Gracias y felicitaciones por tu dedicación!! > > > > Alberto Soto > > > > *De:* Aida Noblia [mailto:aidanoblia@gmail.com] > *Enviado el:* jueves, 03 de abril de 2014 08:36 p.m. > > *Para:* Alberto Soto > *CC:* Fatima Cambronero; LACRALO Español > *Asunto:* Re: [lac-discuss-es] RV: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- > ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data > Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > > > Hola a todos: > > > > Gracias Alberto por la amplia información. También para no aburrir y que > tengan una información directa, dejo el link del sitio gubernamental donde > encuentran la legislación nacional y alguna de la iberoamericana y > jurisprudencia nacional www.datospersonales.gub.uy. > > Si bien el plazo que fijaste está vencido no se si el plazo para > comentarios o al menos entiendo que como decías el tema es muy importante. > > Por eso y porque no puedo enviar a wiki esto porque no puedo entrar debido > a los problemas que hubo con la wiki, les envío esto que venía redactando > > Un par de comentarios, que son previos al enfoque concreto solicitado > sobre la declaración: > > Por un lado estos derechos nuevos a datos personales y acceso a > información, todavía no están incorporados en los paradigmas de la gente, > es muy asimétrico el proceso, muchos ni la conocen, son derechos humanos de > nueva generación, de la Era Digital, se van insertando en la conciencia de > las personas. > > En distintos países la brecha real es tan grande, que muchas personas no > entienden que estos sean sus derechos, porque están reclamando por otras > urgencias: seguridad en las calles, cese a la violencia, al hambre, derecho > a la salud, etc. > > Entiendo que desde el punto de vista de ICANN es bueno conocer estas > disposiciones, tema que ya se ha estudia desde hace un tiempo en el EWG > según mencionó Carlton en B. Aires el año pasado. > > Por otro lado: las mismas disposiciones legales tienen excepciones, > bastante estrictas y limitadas, incluso respecto a la comunicación o > períodos de conservación de los datos, en que hay otros intereses de la > comunidad prioritarios, por ejemplo datos que figuran en fuentes públicas o > listados, o la Base de Datos del Banco Central sobre datos crediticios, > o con las caracteristicas determinadas por la ley. Por la excepción se > hacen públicos los datos de su responsabilidad crediticia de las personas > (incumplimientos, etc) por un período determinado, para protección de la > estabilidad del mercado financiero. También hay otras respecto a > determinados ámbitos , pero para focalizarnos en el tema omitimos, están en > las leyes. > > En el caso concreto planteado de la declaración, la exención se produce > para proteger intereses particulares de los registros, dadas sus > dificultades en cumplir las normas legales, según lo expuesto por los > interesados. > > Creo que desde el punto de vista de ICANN es bueno conocer las > legislaciones, tema que ya se ha estudiado el EWG según mencionó Carlton en > B. Aires el año pasado. > > Pero es necesario tener en cuenta también que el motivo concreto y el > objetivo propuesto es un problema particular, al que se refiere la > Declaración que trata del tema de establecer una adecuada política de > ICANN a nivel global, que pueda contemplar las necesidades de los servicios > que brinda, sin desconocer legislaciones, pero sin asumir responsabilidades > por cuestiones que legalmente no le corresponden y sin que las exenciones, > en el caso concreto, perjudiquen la confiabilidad, estabilidad y seguridad > del servicio que ICANN brinda a la comunidad. Las nuevas RAA establecen las > responsabilidades del solicitante y registrador, de las cuales, mediante el > procedimiento de exención al que refiere la Declaración en estudio, se > libera al registro al liberarlo de la conservación de los datos. > > Aquí hay un problema concreto a resolver que no solo queda en esta > Declaración al respecto sobre la que se hacen estos comentarios. ICANN no > puede liberar a las partes de una obligación legal porque no tiene > potestades para eso. Intenta resolver el problema para mantener su servicio > de manera confiable y segura, máxime con los nuevos riesgos que implican > los nuevos gTLD. Pero no es ni nunca fue el propietario de la base ni el > que recibe y controla los datos o los mantiene. > > > > Esa era una obligación hacia el solicitante, quien paga para que se le > gestione el dominio y tiene derecho a reclamar que se le preste en forma > legal. También el solicitante tiene a su vez obligación de proporcionar > datos y actualizarlos. Aquí el sistema "bottom-up" se aplica respecto a la > responsabilidad y como cooperación para el funcionamiento del sistema > global, porque quien es el titular de los datos es el que está protegido > por el sistema, normalmente el más interesado en proteger sus datos, y el > que más directamente puede aportarlos en el mínimo tiempo. > > > > En cuanto al tema de la responsabilidad, que es el que está en juego en el > caso de los Registros que estamos viendo, es muy claro quiénes son los > responsables y de qué. Está en las nuevas RAA (Acuerdos de Registración) > > > > En otros casos de exenciones incluso legales a la conservación de datos > personales, por ejemplo en Uruguay, en lo relativo a la central de riesgos > crediticios que mencioné antes, se establece expresamente que las personas > físicas y jurídicas del sistema de intermediación financiera que > suministren la información contenida en la Central de Riesgos Crediticios a > cargo del Banco Central del Uruguay serán las únicas responsables por la > veracidad y actualización de la misma. > > > > La base de datos la lleva el Banco Central, que es un tercero, pero queda > claro que no es el responsable del contenido de la base porque solo > mantiene un sistema informático en base a datos que se le proporcionan. Es > esta la responsabilidad que está en juego, que se rige por la lógica de la > justicia de responder por los actos propios o de los dependientes. El Banco > responde del buen funcionamiento del sistema informático que sostiene la > base de datos en línea. > > > > Entiendo que en el caso de ICANN, de hacerse alguna exención, debe quedar > expresamente establecido que ICANN no asume responsabilidad, por cualquier > reglamación que pudiera surgir al respecto. Esto lo considero de suma > importancia para ICANN en la defensa del interés público y del cumplimiento > de sus propios fines. > > > > El problema surge a raíz de la complejidad agregada por la incorporación > de los nuevos gTLD, que incrementa de manera exponencial la administración > y manejo de una cantidad mucho mayor de datos, lo que implica recepción, > control de calidad de los datos, conservación, procesos de modificación > cuando corresponda, o de cancelación en su caso. El modo en que se regula > ahora mejorará indidablemente la calidad de los datos y el servicio en > general. > > > > La posición de los registros ante esto es tratar de liberarse de la > complejidad y en el caso de la obligación de conservación de datos así no > tenemos estos problemas ni estas responsabilidades, pero por más delegación > que haya, ICANN no es y nunca fue el dueño de la base de datos, son como > antes, los registros los responsables tanto de la recolección como de la > conservación. > > > > El interés de ICANN, no es el mismo que el de los Registros, pues es más > general, administrar adecuadamente y en forma segura y confiable la > Internet y todos los los dominios. Debe ser contemplar los intereses y > necesidades de todas las partesy involucradas, en eso consiste su propia > función y finalidad. En este caso, ICANN necesita desempeñar bien la > función que tiene en bien de la comunidad de Internet, no en su beneficio > particular, trabaja para la seguridad misma de la red y que se genere la > menor cantidad posible de conflictos: datos exactos, adecuados, no > excesivos, en tiempo y forma... calidad y cantidad de datos, eliminar datos > erróneos, extemporáneos, conservar los necesarios por el tiempo necesario > para cumplir mejor su función. > > > > Los registros siguen siendo los responsables de la base como siempre, de > lo que pueden manejar en la recolección y mantenimiento de los datos, pero > con un servicio especializado que les apoya para que puedan cumplir mejor > su función en la nueva Era y con estos nuevos dominios. Lo que se terceriza > para mejorar es una parte de su trabajo, que forma parte de *su *negocio. > Esto no es una crítica, sino simplemente es la situación de hecho lo que > estamos expresando. > > > > Por eso entiendo que está bien la Declaración, estoy de acuerdo con ella y > con tratar de que quienes son responsables y tienen su ventaja económica en > la actividad que prestan, también cumplan con las normas como corresponde, > y que en caso de que ICANN los exonere en lo interno de la relación, de > surgir algún perjuicio, ICANN no se hace de ningún modo responsable del > mismo, subsistiendo la responsabilidad en quienes la tienen legalmente. > aunque les implique mayores pero costos.* Entiendo que esto debería > quedar expresamente establecido y firmado por ambas partes.* > > > > De lo contrario terceros perjudicados podrían entender que al exonerar > ICANN a los registradores de esa responsabilidad, se estarían subrogando en > las consecuencias jurídicas que podría aparejar para los registradores el > hecho de no cumplir con la conservación de los datos. > > Saludos a todos > > > > El 27 de marzo de 2014, 0:58, Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> > escribió: > > Aída y todos. Nuestras leyes (Uruguay y Argentina), están inspiradas en la > LSI española, así que pueden diferir algo en la forma, pero no en el fondo. > La Ley Argentina de Protección de Datos Personales no habla de retención de > datos en comunicaciones. Sí, hubo una ley sobre este último tema, pero fue > dejada en "suspensión" por las numerosas críticas recibidas. > > La Ley argentina es la Nro 25326, que también define datos personales > (información de cualquier tipo referida a personas físicas o de existencia > ideal determinadas o determinables; y Datos sensibles ( Datos personales > que revelan origen racial y étnico, opiniones políticas, convicciones > religiosas, filosóficas o morales, afiliación sindical e información > referente a la salud o a la vida sexual). > > También define "Tratamiento de datos: Operaciones y procedimientos > sistemáticos, electrónicos o no, que permitan la recolección, conservación, > ordenación, almacenamiento, modificación, relacionamiento, evaluación, > bloqueo, destrucción, y en general el procesamiento de datos personales, > así como también su cesión a terceros a través de comunicaciones, > consultas, interconexiones o transferencias." > > Respecto de la seguridad de la información, nuestra Ley dice: 1. El > responsable o usuario del archivo de datos debe adoptar las medidas > técnicas y organizativas que resulten necesarias para garantizar la > seguridad y confidencialidad de los datos personales, de modo de evitar su > adulteración, pérdida, consulta o tratamiento no autorizado, y que permitan > detectar desviaciones, intencionales o no, de información, ya sea que los > riesgos provengan de la acción humana o del medio técnico utilizado. > > 2. Queda prohibido registrar datos personales en archivos, registros o > bancos que no reúnan condiciones técnicas de integridad y seguridad. > > Respecto de la confidencialidad: 1. El responsable y las personas que > intervengan en cualquier fase del tratamiento de datos personales están > obligados al secreto profesional respecto de los mismos. Tal obligación > subsistirá aun después de finalizada su relación con el titular del archivo > de datos. > > 2. El obligado podrá ser relevado del deber de secreto por resolución > judicial y cuando medien razones fundadas relativas a la seguridad pública, > la defensa nacional o la salud pública. > > Respecto de la Cesión de Datos: 1. Los datos personales objeto de > tratamiento sólo pueden ser cedidos para el cumplimiento de los fines > directamente relacionados con el interés legítimo del cedente y del > cesionario y con el previo consentimiento del titular de los datos, al que > se le debe informar sobre la finalidad de la cesión e identificar al > cesionario o los elementos que permitan hacerlo. > > Luego de esta larga introducción, debo coincidir contigo prácticamente en > todo. > > Entiendo que tanto un Registrador como un Registrante, tienen (o deberían > tener!) una infraestructura tecnológica adecuada a las necesidades. Es > decir que tienen un adecuado sistema de seguridad de la información, con > separaciones entre sus servidores de áreas administrativas y de producción, > inclusive de desarrollo de sistemas si es que tienen esta área. Además de > su red interna de comunicaciones, separadas y sin posibilidad de acceso > entre las diferentes áreas, elemental en un prestador de servicios de > internet. Esto, además de ajustarse a las leyes locales de protección de > datos personales. > > Esto implicaría, por ejemplo, que los elementos de datos descriptos en > los puntos 1.1.8 (Procesamiento de pagos recurrentes); y el 1.2.1. > (Información relativa a pagos concurrentes), están resguardados en un lugar > diferente a los elementos de datos del Whois, con lo cual el acceso a los > mismos es solo posible, libre para este último, y por personal interno del > registrador o registrante a la información de los precitados ítems, que > contienen asociados nombres, tarjetas de crédito, domicilios, etc. Se > afirma que si se suprime la fuente de información de pago, un registrante > no tendrá manera de evaluar los reclamos de disputa de facturación o > devoluciones del cargo del proceso. Que en muchos casos en disputa con > tarjetas de crédito o cargos bancarios. > > Esto está relacionado con la legislación de cada país. En Argentina, las > tarjetas de crédito y los bancos tienen la obligación de guardar este tipo > de información durante muchos años; en este momento no recuerdo si son > siete o diez años. De ser así, existen al menos dos lugares con la > información necesaria. > > > > Con respecto a los temas de hackeo, venta irregular de dominio por engaño > del comprador,etc., se habla de un año o más de retención de datos. Este > plazo tiene que tener relación con la prescripción del delito cometido, > porque si prescribe a los dos años, no debo guardarlos por tres años. > > Entiendo que no se fijen plazos de retención, porque este tema ha sido y > sigue siendo muy discutido por que requiere almacenamiento, medidas de > seguridad adicionales, etc. Y más aún siendo datos de tráfico. > > > > Espero no haber aburrido > > Saludos cordiales > > > > Alberto Soto > > > > *De:* Aida Noblia [mailto:aidanoblia@gmail.com] > *Enviado el:* miércoles, 26 de marzo de 2014 04:55 p.m. > *Para:* Alberto Soto > *CC:* Fatima Cambronero; LACRALO Español > > > *Asunto:* Re: [lac-discuss-es] RV: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- > ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data > Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > > > Fátima, Alberto, Alejandro y todos: > > > > Entiendo que sí es un tema muy importante, complejo y también en las > legislaciones, no pude asistir a la mesa redonda que mencionó Fátima, se > puede escuchar alguna grabación? todavía queda algo de plazo para > comentarios ? no tengo claro cuál es la fecha de cierre de comentarios. > > > > Las legislaciones nacionales sobre protección de datos personales son > bastante estrictas, también las de derecho de acceso a la información > pública, porque ahí estaría el límite necesario para saber lo que se puede > y debe publicar y lo que no, con qué extensión, por cuánto tiempo, quiénes > pueden hacerlo, qué datos se pueden publicar líbremente y cuáles requieren > el consentimiento libre, expreso, escrito, del titular... > > > > En Uruguay la ley 18331 y sus decretos reglamentarios refieren a la > protección de datos personales (calificados en dos tipos (sensibles o no) > ,como un derecho humano amparado por la constitución de la República. Se > otorga al titular de los datos personales los derechos ARCO, sigla que a > nivel de las legislaciones incluye derecho de Acceso a la base de datos, > Rectificación de los datos erróneos o modificados en la realidad, > Corrección de datos erróneos o inexactos y Oposición a que se haga lo que > la ley llama "tratamiento" de los datos que es en general cualquier uso de > esos datos personales, sin el consentimiento escrito y expreso de su > titular. > > > > Hay una Unidad Reguladora de Registro y Control de esos datos a cargo de > la Agencia del Gobierno Electrónico, que lleva el Registro de las Bases > que contienen datos personales, obligatorio para todo el que tiene una > base, ya sea de personas públicas o privadas, controla, realiza > procedimientos y auditorías y sanciona a los infractores con multas e > incluso clausura de la base de datos. > > > > Hay un responsable de la base y un encargado de llevarla en la práctica > por cuenta de terceros o la suya propia. La ley regula sus > responsabilidades. El propietario de la base, persona física o jurídica es > el que responde por el uso o tratamiento de los datos personales al > titular de esos datos. > > > > Aún cuando se puedan usar o tratar en determinadas circunstancias, con > consentimiento del titular o en los casos de datos que se admita su > tratamiento sin él, los datos personales no pueden ser usados para otros > fines que para los que el titular su uso permitió. > > > > El responsable de la base es su propietario o quien decide su uso: Los > datos personales son recolectados para una finalidad y deben ser > eliminados una vez que se cumplió la finalidad para la que se recolectaron, > se pueden trasmitir solo en determinadas condiciones.. etc. Es ese > responsable de la base, que puede ser persona física o jurídica, a quien el > titular de los datos puede exigir el cumplimiento o las sanciones que > puedan corresponder. > > > > Con variantes, esto se repite en las legislaciones. En caso de > transferencia internacional de datos se aplica el derecho internacional, y > por tanto habrá que analizar cuál es la ley aplicable y la jurisdicción > competencia. > > > > > > En el caso de ICANN, el propietario de la base de datos *no* es ICANN, > por tanto, *no *es responsable legalmente del tratamiento que se realice > de los datos personales. > > > > Según pude ver, en el sistema del nuevo acuerdo, el servicio se terceriza, > para mejorarlo en cuanto a la calidad de los datos y también respecto a su > tratamiento, pero eso no implica el cambio de propietario. > > > > Entonces, ICANN consiente la "excención" de retención de datos, en > algunos casos puntuales que analiza y mediante un procedimiento especial, > pero perjudicando el servicio que se pretendía mejorar a los usuarios por > este nuevo medio. > > > > Esto se hace a pedido de los registros para quedar liberados de su > responsabilidad legal porque al no tener que conservar los datos según el > acuerdo con ICANN ya no tienen que responder ante la ley por su > conservación, deterioro, mal uso, etc. Se insiste en la exigencia de la > buena fe por parte del propietario o titular de la base de datos (registro) > que contiene dichos datos, aunque esta buena fe es un asunto de difícil > prueba cierta. > > > > Además, al no conservar estos datos, se impide que haya posibilidades > cumplir las funciones de ICANN en estos casos, respecto a la prevención de > daños que se puedan ocasionar por uso indebido de nombres de dominio y > similares. > > > > > > El tema es analizar en cada caso de estas solicitudes, si realmente la > retención de estos datos es necesaria para la prestación del servicio que > se brinda a través del Registro o si ella constituye una violación de la > ley. En el blog que se mencionan los casos que se pueden dar y no parecen > tan raros. Y la posición de los registradores es claramente buscar que se > les facilite su tarea. pero en este caso podría ser contra la efectividad y > certeza del servicio que brinda ICANN. De lo que ya se ha dado y se puede > ver en la web, parece que predomina la seguridad. Pero más allá de los > requisitos de presentación que tiene el caso (con informes de abogado , etc > ) debería estudiarse muy bien en que casos se da y no tanto presumir la > buena fe como forma de resolver estos casos. > > > > De otro modo por dar un respaldo a los propietarios de los Registros los > libera de responsabilidades legales, con riesgo de afectar el cumplimiento > de otras obligaciones, todo a afectar otras obligaciones que tiene el > Registro y su propietario como dueño o quien trata los datos. > > > > Como decían me parece un asunto de interés. > > > > > > Saludos > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-03-22 20:59 GMT-03:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org>: > > > > Fátima, solo serán las 04:00 AM en Buenos Aires... Pero prometo participar. > > Gracias!! > > > > Alberto Soto > > > > De: Fatima Cambronero [mailto:fatimacambronero@gmail.com] > Enviado el: sábado, 22 de marzo de 2014 08:54 p.m. > Para: Alberto Soto > CC: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; LACRALO Español > Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] RV: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN > > Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements > and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > Alejandro, Alberto, > > > > Comparto la opinión de que estamos frente a un tema interesante que > deberíamos poder analizar y pronunciarnos desde nuestra región. > > > > El día lunes 24 a las 15 hs. local de Singapur está prevista una Mesa > Redonda sobre Servicios de Directorio de Registro: presente y futuro. Si > bien este tema concretamente no está incluido en la agenda de la reunión, > es > un tema muy relacionado que quizás aparezca en los debates. > > > > Sería bueno participar en esta Mesa Redonda para escuchar y discutir los > comentarios que pueda haber al respecto. Entiendo que en el horario de > nuestros países queda en una franja un poco complicada. Yo voy a estar > atendiendo a dicha reunión. Si hay algún comentario o consulta que quieran > hacer llegar, me ofrezco para transmitirlos. > > > > Este es el enlace a la agenda de esta Mesa Redonda: > > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Roundtable+on+Registrat > ion+Directory+Services%3A+Now+and+the+Future+-+2014.03.24+-+Singapore > > > > Aquí el enlace al Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/sin49-vip/ > (este es el mismo para todas las reuniones de At-Large de la semana). > > > > Saludos cordiales, > > Fatima Cambronero > > > > 2014-03-21 23:40 GMT-03:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org > > <mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org> >: > > > Creo que el interés debe ser suficiente. Es justamente uno de los temas > que > hacen a la existencia de entidades orientadas al usuario final de Internet, > es decir, NOSOTROS. > Con seguridad hay distintas legislaciones para cada país, al menos en > algunos ítems sustanciales. Aunque hay países que aún no tienen > legislación. > Hay 30 días para comentarios, es poco tiempo para la importancia del tema. > Sugiero que muy rápidamente las respectivas ALSs de cada país de nuestra > Región, lea los antecedentes de esta referencia, y luego informen la > legislación vigente en su respectivo país, con comentarios. También sugiero > que para esta primera fase, la fecha límite sea el próximo viernes > 28/03/2014. > También sugiero que quienes están participando en Singapur, sean eximidos > de > participar, tienen cosas muy importante que hacer por nosotros. > > Saludos cordiales > > Alberto Soto > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > [mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> ] En nombre de Dr. > Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Enviado el: viernes, 21 de marzo de 2014 11:25 p.m. > Para: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Asunto: [lac-discuss-es] RV: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN > Seeks > > Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and > Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > Colegas, > > el llamado anexo puede tener implicaciones legales apreciables en nuestra > región. Convoquemos a los expertos en protección de datos personales y > otros > temas relacionados con la retención de datos (cómputo forense, leyes de > telecomunicaciones, Marco Civil en el caso particular de Brasil) para > conformar una opinión sólida, si hay el interés suficiente. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > ________________________________________ > Desde: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > [alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> ] en nombre de > ICANN > At-Large > Staff [staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> ] Enviado > > el: viernes, 21 de marzo de 2014 > 20:00 > Hasta: ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Asunto: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Seeks Public Comment on > 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes > for Collection and Retention > > [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> > News Alert > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-21mar14-en.htm > > ________________________________ > ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data > Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > 21 March 2014 > > ICANN has been in discussions with a number of Registrars regarding data > retention waiver requests ("Waiver Requests") submitted under the 2013 > Registrar Accreditation Agreement (the "2013 RAA"). Some Registrars are > seeking an exemption from certain collection and/or retention requirements > under the Data Retention Specification (the "Specification") of the 2013 > RAA. Section 2 of the Data Retention Specification sets forth requirements > regarding the written materials a Registrar must submit in support of its > good faith determination that the collection and/or retention of any data > element specified in the Specification violates applicable law, and > provides > that following notice to ICANN of the Waiver Request, ICANN and the > applicable Registrar shall discuss the matter in good faith in an effort to > reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the matter. An update on the 2013 > RAA and the data retention waiver process can be found here: > > http://blog.icann.org/2014/02/update-on-2013-raa-and-data-retention-waiver-p > > < > http://blog.icann.org/2014/02/update-on-2013-raa-and-data-retention-waiver- > process/> > > rocess/ > > ICANN understands that personal data should be treated in accordance with > applicable data protection laws, which generally permit gathering and > retention of personal data for legitimate purpose(s). ICANN also > understands > that the law may vary from country to country as to (i) what is considered > a > legitimate purpose, (ii) whether the personal data is adequate, relevant > and > not excessive in relation to the legitimate purpose for which they are > collected and (iii) for how long certain data elements may be retained. In > other words, what is considered a legitimate purpose for collection of > certain data in one country may not be considered a legitimate purpose in > another country. > > During ICANN's discussions in an effort to reach a mutually acceptable > resolution of the matter, some Registrars have requested that ICANN (a) > clarify and better define certain data elements described in the Data > Retention Specification that the Registrars maintain are not clearly > defined; and (b) describe potentially legitimate purposes for collection > and > retention of each data element that would help provide guidance for > Registrars both as to whether such elements may be lawfully collected, and, > if so, for how long such elements might lawfully be retained. > > In response to these requests from some Registrars, ICANN is posting for > public comment a document seeking to clarify what is meant by certain data > elements described in the Data Retention Specification and describing > potentially legitimate purposes for collection and retention of those data > elements. That document can be found > here< > http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/draft-data-retention-s > > < > http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/draft-data-retention-spec- > elements-21mar14-en.pdf> > > pec-elements-21mar14-en.pdf> [PDF, 116 KB]. The document will be posted for > a period of thirty (30) days to seek feedback and input from the community > on (i) whether the data elements are appropriately described, (ii) whether > the cited purposes for collection and retention are appropriate and > legitimate, and (iii) whether there are other potentially legitimate > purposes for collection and retention of such data elements. After the > thirty (30) day period following this posting has expired, ICANN will > consider all feedback and input received in connection with ICANN's ongoing > discussions to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of Waiver Requests. > In > the interim, ICANN will continue its ongoing discussions to reach a > mutually > acceptable resolution of Waiver Requests with individual Registrars with > the > goal of granting additional Waiver Requests as and when appropriate. > > A public comment period will remain open until 23:59 p.m. PDT/California, > 21 > April 2014. Public comments will be available for consideration by ICANN > staff and the ICANN Board. > > * Comments can be posted to: > comments-retention-21mar14(a)icann.org > <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann.org> > > <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann > > <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann> > .org> > * Comments can be viewed at: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-retention-21mar14/ > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC-Announce mailing list > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > > -- > > Fatima Cambronero > > Abogada-Argentina > > Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 > Twitter: @facambronero > Skype: fatima.cambronero > > Join the LACRALO/ICANN discussions: > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > > Join the Diplo Internet Governance Community discussions: > > http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/ > > Join to the Internet Society (ISOC): http://www.internetsociety.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > > > -- > Aida Noblia > > > > > > -- > Aida Noblia > Aida Noblia _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/8704419dcc.html --]]

1 0

Fwd: Recognizing Our Community Leaders - Blog by David Olive
by Carlton Samuels April 4, 2014

April 4, 2014

See our colleagues being honoured for their service. Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= http://blog.icann.org/2014/04/recognizing-our-community-leaders/ ICANN's growth and evolution as a multistakeholder organization depends on the sustained engagement of our community. Indeed, our greatest asset is community member time and commitment to the work of ICANN. -- David A. Olive *Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters -Istanbul* *Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) * *Hakki Yeten Cad. Selenium Plaza No:10/C K:5* *34349 Fulya, Besiktas, Istanbul, Turkey * *Tel: +90.212.381.8727 <%2B90.212.381.8727> - Fax: +90.212.381.8731 <%2B90.212.381.8731> - Mobile: +1. 202.341.3611 <%2B1.%20202.341.3611>*

1 0

RES: CROPP Program
by sylvia＠internautabrasil.org April 4, 2014

April 4, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: RES: CROPP Program From: sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org Great news! Regards Sylvia ___________________________________________________ Sylvia Herlein sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org Secretary-LACRALO ICANN / 2012-2014 - http://atlarge.icann.org Secretary FLUI 2009-2015 sylvia_leite = Skype ----- Mensagem Original ----- From: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome Alberto Thicket Posted in: Thursday, April 3, 2014 2:03 To: LACRALO Espaol Cc: 'ICANN At-Large Staff' Assunto: [lac-discuss-es] CROPP Program Dear, as long habrn seen on the list, was coordinating in two passes (and HAITI DOMINICAN REPUBLIC), for meetings capitals, to seek organizations that can certified as ALS.Also solicit another mail if anyone dominated the francs, and we got it. After much coordination, we have presented the two projects and Dev Anand Teelucksingh delivered on Thursday, 27 March, and were in waiting for reply. We have made a significant effort, coordinating with representatives of both countries, and local sponsors achieved great enthusiasm for try to stop being a country that does not have an organization that represents to end users. In Haithay two organizations involved and trying to incorporate ESTN ams, and Dominican Republic there are three, two educational institutes of higher level and one government. All this according to the model of multiple parties interested. In turn, for the first days of May (7, 8 and 9) have been invited to give a lecture and a workshop LATIN AMERICAN CONGRESS SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY NATIONAL CONFERENCE and DEN CLOUD COMPUTING in Cochabamba, BOLIVIA.In this case, although the organizers can not afford what is necessary to me, and no time to make a request for the CROPP program costs assume them involved. Allpor the importance of the issue, have included a third participacinma and darun seminar, similar to those in dictarn PUERTO Prince, HAITI AND SANTO DOMINGO, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC. The seminars denominarn: The role of users in Governance Internet And the agenda to develop next serel: - Internet Governance - ICANN: Mission, vision, Internet Ecosystem - At-Large Organizations: Your participation in the various ICANN geographic regions. Latinoamrica and Caribbean region (LACRALO) - How to get involved as an organization At-Large Just wait for the approval of projects in CROPP program. Best Regards Alberto Soto _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/32110e805f.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] RV: ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention
by asoto＠ibero-americano.org April 3, 2014

April 3, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: RV: ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention From: asoto(a)ibero-americano.org Impeccable Ada. The period I had said was to discuss the list, but until now there were only three comments. The term pblicos comments estarabierto to 23:59 UTC on April 21. Thank you and congratulations on your dedication! Alberto Soto From: Aida Noblia [mailto: aidanoblia(a)gmail.com] Posted on: Thursday, April 3, 2014 08:36 pm To: Alberto Soto CC: Fatima Cambronero; LACRALO Espaol Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Re: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Data Elements Specification and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention Hello everyone: Thanks Alberto for comprehensive information. Also not to bore and I have direct information, leave the link to the government site where legislacin are national and some of the Latin American and national jurisprudence <http://www.datospersonales.gub.uy/> www.datospersonales.gub.uy. Although the term is not estvencido you posted if the comment period or at least as Decas understand that the issue is very important. That and because I can not send this wiki because I can not enter because There were problems with the wiki, mailing them this vein that drafted A couple of comments, which are requested prior to focus specifically on the declaration: On the one hand these new rights to access personal data and information, ESTN will still not incorporated in the paradigms of the people, it is very asymmetrical process, many do not know it, human rights are new generation of the Digital Age, will inserting into the consciousness of the people. In different countries the real gap is so great that many people do not understand that these are your rights, claiming that ESTN other emergency department: safe streets, stop violence, hunger, right health, etc.. I understand that from the point of view of ICANN's good to know these provisions topic has already been studied for the last time in the EWG According mencionCarlton in B. Aires last year. On the other hand: the same laws have exceptions, pretty strict and limited, even in respect of periods of comunicacino preservation of data, there are other community interests priority, eg set them in the bublic data sources or lists, Database or the Central Bank on credit data, or the characteristics determined by law. What are the exception pblicos the data of your credit responsibility of persons (defaults, etc.) for a specified period, for protection of stability financial market.There are also other for certain FIELDS, but to omit the subject to focus on, we ESTN in laws. In the specific case raised from the declaration, the exencin occurs for protect interests of records, given their difficulties in meeting legal standards, according to the statement made by the interested parties. I think from the point of view of ICANN's good to know the laws, an issue that has already been studied in the EWG According mencionCarlton B. Aires last year. But it is also necessary to consider the specific reason and proposed target is a particular problem, referred to the Declaration dealing with the issue of establishing an appropriate policy of ICANN globally, that can address the needs of the services provides, without prejudice to laws, but assume no responsibility for issues that do not belong legally and without exemptions, the case, impair the reliability, stability and safety ICANN provides service to the community.Establishing the new AAR applicant's responsibilities and recorder, which, by exencin procedure referring to the Declaration under study, Free registration to release the preservation of data. Aquhay solve a particular problem is not only in this Declaration on the matter on which they are made these comments. ICANN not you can free the parties to a legal obligation because it has powers for that. Try to solve the problem for hold serve reliably and safely, mxime with the new risks posed by new gTLDs. But it is not and never was the owner of the database or which receive and control data or maintained. That was an obligation to the applicant, who will pay for manage the domain and is entitled to claim that you pay as legal. Also the applicant has in turn obligation to provide and update data.That "bottom-up" system applies regarding the as cooperation and responsibility for system operation global, because who is the owner of the data is that estprotegido by the system, usually the more interested in protecting their data, and that ms can contribute them directly in the minimum time. On the issue of liability, which is the game who are in the Records if you're seeing, it is very clear who they are the responsible and qu. Whether the new RAA (Registracin Agreements) In other cases even legal exemptions to the preservation of data personal, for example in Uruguay, with regard to the credit bureau credit that mencionantes, expressly provides that persons physically challenged and legal bodies of the system of financial intermediation that provide the information contained in the Central Credit Risk by the Central Bank of Uruguay Sern the Nicaraguan responsible for the accuracy and Upgrading of the same. The database takes the Central Bank, which is a third, but remains clearly not responsible for the content of the database because only maintains one computer system based on data that are provided. It is this responsibility who are game, which is governed by the logic of justice responding by themselves or dependent events. The Bank responds the proper functioning of the computer system holding base data online. I understand that in the case of ICANN, any exencin be made, it should be expressly stated that ICANN does not assume responsibility for any reglamacin that might arise in this regard. This I can not overemphasize importance to ICANN interspblico defense and compliance their own purposes. The problem arises reason of the complexity added by the incorporation of new gTLDs, which increases exponentially the Administration and handling a much larger amount of data, which means reception, control data quality, conservation, modification processes where appropriate, or if cancelacin. The way in which regulates Now mejorarindidablemente the quality of data and service general. The position of the records before this is trying to break free from the complexity and in the case of the obligation of preservation of data Ass have these problems and these responsibilities, but ms delegacin there, ICANN is not and never was the owner of the database are as earlier records responsible recoleccin as both the conservation. The interest of ICANN, is not the same as the registers, it is more Overall, properly manage and secure and reliable Internet and all domains.Must be address the interests and needs of PARTS AND all involved, that's what your own funciny purpose. In this case, ICANN requires desempear well the function that has good of the Internet community, not in their benefit, working for the same security network and generated the least amount possible Conflict: accurate, relevant, not excessive, and timely data ... quality and quantity of data, delete Erroneous, extemporneos data store the necessary for the time necessary to better meet your function. The records remain responsible base as always, what they can handle in maintaining recolecciny data, but with a specialized service that supports them so that they can better fulfill their function in the new era and these new domains. What is outsourced to improve is a part of their work, which is part of your business. This is not a criticism, but simply the situation is in fact what we are expressing. I understand why estbien the Declaration, agree with it and with trying those who are responsible and have its economic advantage in activity they provide, also comply with the rules properly, and that if ICANN internally exonerate the relationship, arise sb injury is not ICANN OF ANY way responsible for it, subsisting liability on those who have legally. although they but involves higher costs. I understand this must be expressly drawn up and signed by both parties. Otherwise injured party will be able to understand that ICANN exempt registrars of the responsibility is on the keychain subrogating consequences that may prepare legal bodies for the fact registrars not comply with the conservation of the data. Greetings to all The March 27, 2014, 0:58, Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org <mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org> > Wrote: Ada and all.Our laws (Uruguay and Argentina), inspired ESTN LSI espaola, asque may differ somewhat in form but not in substance. Argentina's Law of Personal Data Protection does not speak of retention of data communications. S, there was a law on this last topic, but was left in suspension by the numerous criticisms received. The Act Argentina is the No. 25326, which also defines personal data (Information of any kind referred to physical persons or existence ideally determined or determinable; and sensitive data (personal data revealing racial and ethnic background, policies opinions, convictions religious, Philosophical or moral, union affiliation and information concerning health or sex life). Also defines Data processing: Operations and procedures sistemticos, electrnicos or not, enabling the recoleccin, conservation, ordenacin, storage, modification, relationship, evaluation, blockade, destruction, and general processing of personal data, as as also his third cesina to Travs communications, consultations, interconnections or transfers. With regard to information security, our law says: 1. The responsible or user data file must adopt measures techniques and organizational measures necessary to ensure the safety and confidentiality of personal data, in order to avoid adulteracin, loss, or unauthorized consultation, and to detect deviations, intentional or otherwise, of information, whether the risks from human action or technician medium used. Two. It is prohibited to record personal data in files, records or banks not renan techniques Payment integrity and security. Regarding confidentiality: 1.And responsible persons involved at any stage of the processing of personal data ESTN bound to secrecy regarding the same. Such obligation subsistiraun completed after his relationship with the owner of the file data. Two. The forced podrser relieved of secrecy by resolution court and for compelling grounds relating to public safety, national defense or public health. Regarding the Cesin Data: 1. Personal data object treatment can only be assigned to fulfill the purposes directly related to the legitimate interest of the transferor and assignee and with the consent of the owner of the data, which must be informed about the purpose of identifying the CESINE transferee or the elements to do so. After this long introduction, I must agree with you on virtually everything. I understand that both a Registrar as a Registrant, have (or MUST have!) an appropriate technology infrastructure needs.This is say that they have an adequate system of information security, with separations between their servers and production management areas, including systems development if they have this area. In addition to its internal communications network, separated and denied access between different areas, elemental a service provider internet. This, in addition to comply with the local laws of protection of personal data. This would involve, for example, that the data elements described in the points 1.1.8 (Processing recurring payments); and 1.2.1. (Information on concurrent payments) ESTN sheltered in a different place elements Whois data, which access to them is only possible for this last free, and internal staff registrar or registrant to information of the aforementioned tems, which contain associated names, credit cards, addresses, etc.. It states that if the source of payment information is deleted, not a registrant tendrmanera evaluate claims dispute facturacino Returns the position of the process.In many cases in dispute with credit cards or bank charges. The legislation this estrelacionado with each country. In Argentina, the credit cards and banks have the obligation to keep such of information for many years; at this time I do not remember if there are seven or ten years. If as there are at least two places with information necessary. With regard to the issues of hacking, irregular domain sale by deception Buyer, etc.., speaks of a aooms of data retention. This term must have prescripcin relationship with the crime, because if barred two years, I should not keep them for three years. I understand that retention periods are set, because this issue has been and remains very controversial because it requires storage measures additional security, etc.. And msan being traffic data. I hope I have not bored Best Regards Alberto Soto From: Aida Noblia [mailto: aidanoblia(a)gmail.com <mailto:aidanoblia@gmail.com> ] Posted on: Wednesdays, March 26, 2014 4:55 pm To: Alberto Soto CC: Fatima Cambronero; LACRALO Espaol Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Re: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Data Elements Specification and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention Fatima, Alberto, Alejandro and all Ses understand that a very important issue, and also in the complex laws, I could not attend the roundtable mencionFtima is You can listen any recording? is still some time for comments? I am not clear what is the closing date for comments. National legislation on protection of personal data are rather strict, and also the right of access to information pblica because ahestara the limit necessary to know what can and must publish and what not, with quextensin, for how long, quines they can do it, you can publish lbremente qudatos cules and require free, express, written consent of the owner ... In Uruguay the Law 18331 and its implementing regulations refer to the protection of personal data (qualified in two types (sensitive or not) As a human right protected by the constitution of the Republic. It provides the owner of the personal data ARCO rights acronym that level legislation includes right to access the database, Corrigendum of Erroneous or modified in reality data correction of Erroneous or inaccurate data and Oposicina done what the law calls "Treatment" of the data that is generally any use of such data personal, without the express written consent of its owner. There is a Regulatory Unit Registration and Control of such data by the Agency electronic government, in the Register of the Specifications contain mandatory for all personal data that has a base, and is of public or private persons, controls, and procedures performed auditing and punishing violators with fines and even closure of the database. There is a base charge and take charge of the practice by account of others or their own. The law regulates their responsibilities. The Database Owner, or physical person jurdica is responding by use or processing of personal data to the owner of that data. An when they can use or deal in certain circumstances, consent of the owner or in cases of data that supports your treatment without l, personal data can not be used for other purposes for which the owner permitted use. The base is responsible for its own use or who decides: The data personal is collected for a purpose and should be eliminated one Once cumplila purpose for which it was collected, can be transmit only in certain conditions .. etc.. It is the responsibility of the base, which can be physical or legal person to whom the owner of the Data may be enforced or penalties that may apply. With variations, this is repeated in the legislation. In case of transfer international data international law applies, and therefore there will to analyze what is the applicable law and jurisdiction competition. In the case of ICANN, the owner of the database is not ICANN, for therefore is not legally responsible for processing that may occur to the personal data. According saw, in the system of the new agreement, the service is outsourced, To improve it in terms of the quality of the data and also about its treatment, but that does not mean the change of ownership. So ICANN agrees the "excencin" of data retention in some analyzing specific cases and by a special procedure, but harming the intended service users improve this new medium. This is done at the request of the records to be released from their liability because by not having to keep the data in accordance with According to ICANN no longer have to answer to the law for their conservation, damage, misuse, etc.. It emphasizes the need for the good faith by the owner or holder of the database (check in) which contains the data, though this good faith is a matter of difficult certain proof. Also, to not keep such data prevents any possibility fulfill the functions of ICANN in such cases, with respect to the prevention of damages that may result from misuse of domain names and similar. The issue in each case is to analyze these requests, if you really retention of such data is necessary for the service prestacin to Travs registry is provided or if it constitutes a violation of the law. The blog that cases can be referred to and do not appear so rare. And the position of registrars is clearly find that facilitate their task. but in this case may be against the effectiveness and completeness of the service provided by ICANN. From what has already been given and can see on the web, it seems that security prevails. But the ms allde presentation requirements of having the case (with reports of attorney, etc. ) Should be studied very well in that case is given rather than presumed good faith as a way to resolve these cases. Otherwise give an endorsement by the owners of the Records released from liability, affect the risk of compliance other obligations, affect all other obligations of the Register and its owner as dueoo who treats data. As decan seems a matter of interest. Regards 3/22/2014 20:59 GMT-03: 00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org <mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org> >: Fatima, only Sern 04:00 am in Buenos Aires but I promise participate. Thank you! Alberto Soto From: Fatima Cambronero [mailto: fatimacambronero(a)gmail.com <mailto:fatimacambronero@gmail.com> ] Posted on: by saturday, March 22, 2014 8:54 pm To: Alberto Soto CC: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; LACRALO Espaol Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Re: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Data Elements Specification and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention Alejandro, Alberto, I share the view of that we are facing an interesting topic deberamos to analyze and speak out from our region. The da Monday 24 at 15 pm. Local Singapore estprevista a Table Round about Directory Services Registration: present and future. If While this issue is not specifically on the agenda estincluido of the meeting is closely related perhaps a topic that appears in the discussions. It will be good to participate in this Roundtable to hear and discuss the comments you may have about it. I understand that the hours of our countries is in a strip a little complicated. I'll be attending this meeting. If there sb who want to comment or view to get, I offer to transmit. This is the link to the agenda of the Roundtable: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Roundtable+on+Registrat < https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Roundtable+on+Registra tion + Directory + Services% 3A + Now + and + the + Future + - +2014.03.24 + - + Singapore> ion + Directory + Services% 3A + Now + and + the + Future + - +2014.03.24 + - + Singapore That link to the Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/sin49-vip/ (This is the same for all meetings of At-Large of the week). Best Regards, Fatima Cambronero 3/21/2014 23:40 GMT-03: 00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org <mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org> <mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org <mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org> >>: I think the interest should be sufficient. It is just one of the topics make the existence of end-user oriented entities Internet ie U.S.. Surely there are different laws for each country, at least in some substantial tems. Although there are countries that do not have an legislation. There are 30 days for comments, there is little time for the importance of the subject. Suggest that very quickly the respective ALS each country of our Regin, read the history of this item, then inform the legislacin force in their respective country, with reviews.Also I suggest that for this first phase, the closing date is the Friday Prximo 28/03/2014. Also suggest that those who are participating in Singapore, are exempt from participate, have very important things to do for us. Best Regards Alberto Soto ----- Original Message ----- From: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> >] On behalf of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Posted on: Friday, March 21, 2014 11:25 pm To: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: [lac-discuss-en] Re: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on Data Retention RAA 2013 Specification and Data Elements Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention Colleagues, called Annex may have significant legal implications in our region. Let us summon experts in protection of personal data and other issues related to data retention (Computational forensics, law telecommunications, Civil Marco in the case of Brazil) to form a opininslida, if there is enough interest. Alejandro Pisanty --------------------------- Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM Faculty of Chemistry 3000 University Avenue, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 <tel:%2B52-1-5541444475> FROM ABROAD +525541444475 <tel:%2B525541444475> SMS +525541444475 FROM MEXICO <tel:%2B525541444475> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Join the LinkedIn group UNAM, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---- >> Join ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________________ From: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > [Alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> >] On behalf of ICANN At-Large Staff [staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> >] Sent on: Friday, March 21, 2014 20:00 To: ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> <mailto:ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on RAA 2013 Specification Data Retention Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention [Http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg] <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-21mar14-en.htm ________________________________ ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Data Specification Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention 21 March 2014 ICANN has-been in discussions with a number of Registrars Regarding data retention requests waiver ("Waiver Requests") submitted under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (the "2013 RAA").Some Registrars are seeking an exemption from Un certain collection and / or retention requirements under the Data Retention Specification (the "Specification") of the 2013 RAA. Section 2 of the Data Retention Specification sets forth requirements Regarding the written materials to register must submit in support of its good faith determination That the collection and / or retention of any data element specified in the Specification Violates applicable law, and Provides That Following notice to ICANN of the Waiver Request, ICANN and the Register applicable Shall discuss the matter in good faith in an effort to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the matter. An update on the 2013 RAA data retention and the waiver process can be found here: http://blog.icann.org/2014/02/update-on-2013-raa-and-data-retention-waiver-p <http://blog.icann.org/2014/02/update-on-2013-raa-and-data-retention-waiver- <http://blog.icann.org/2014/02/update-on-2013-raa-and-data-retention-waiver- process /> process /> rocess / ICANN staff Understands That data Should be Treated in Accordance with applicable data protection laws, que Generally permit gathering and personnel retention of data for legitimate purpose (s). ICANN Also Understands That the law may vary from country to country as to (i) what is Considered to legitimate purpose, (ii) Whether the personnel data is adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the legitimate purpose for Which They are collected and (iii) how long for Un Certain data elements May be Retained. In other words, what is Considered a legitimate purpose for collection of Un certain data in one country May not be Considered a legitimate purpose in another country. During ICANN's discussions in an effort to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the matter, some have Requested That ICANN Registrars (a) AMclarify and better define Un certain data elements in the Data Described Retention Specification Maintain That the Registrars are not Clearly defined; and (b) describes Potentially legitimate ministering purposes for collection and retention of each data element That would help Provide guidance for Both Whether Registrars Such elements as to Lawfully May be collected, and, if so, for how long Such elements Lawfully Might be Retained. In response to requests from some These Registrars, ICANN is posting for seeking public comment a document to what is meant by AMclarify Un certain data elements Described in the Specification and Describing Data Retention Potentially legitimate ministering purposes for collection and retention of Those data elements. That document can be found here <http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/draft-data-retention-s <http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/draft-data-retention-spec- <http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/draft-data-retention-spec- elements-21mar14-en.pdf> elements-21mar14-en.pdf> Breast-elements-21mar14-en.pdf> [PDF, 116 KB]. The document will be posted for a period of thirty (30) days to seek feedback and input from the community on (i) Whether the data elements are Appropriately described, (ii) Whether ministering purposes cited for the collection and retention are Appropriate and legitimate, and (iii) Whether there are other legitimate Potentially ministering purposes for collection and retention of data Such elements. After the thirty (30) day period has expired Following this posting, ICANN will Consider all feedback and input received in Connection with Ongoing ICANNs discussions to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of Waiver Requests. In the interim, ICANN will continue its Ongoing discussions to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of Waiver Requests with Single Registrars With the additional goal of Granting Waiver Requests as and when to Appropriate. A public comment period will REMAIN open until 11:59 p.m. PDT / California, 21 April 2014. Public comments will be available for consideration by ICANN ICANN staff and the Board. * Comments can be posted to: comments-retention-21mar14(a)icann.org <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann.org> <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann.org <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann.org> > <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann> <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann> > . Org> * Comments can be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-retention-21mar14/ _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/437a65c4cd.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] RV: ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention
by aidanoblia＠gmail.com April 3, 2014

April 3, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: RV: ICANN News Alert - ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention From: aidanoblia(a)gmail.com Hello everyone: Thanks Alberto for comprehensive information. Also not to bore and I have direct information, leave the link to the government site where legislacin are national and some of the Latin American and www.datospersonales.gub.uy national jurisprudence. Although the term is not estvencido you posted if the time for Comment or at least understand that as Decas the item is very important. That, and I can not send this wiki because I can not enter because the problems that occurred with the wiki, mailing them this vein that drafted A couple of comments, which are requested prior to focus specifically on the declaration: On the one hand these new rights to access personal data and information, ESTN still not incorporated in the paradigms of the people, the process is very asymmetrical, many do not know it, are human rights new generation of the Digital Age, will inserting Awareness people. In different countries the real gap is so great that many people do not understand that these are your rights, claiming that ESTN other emergency department: safe streets, stop violence, hunger, right health, etc.. I understand that from the point of view of ICANN's good to know these provisions topic has already been studied for the last time in the EWG According mencionCarlton in B. Aires last year. On the other hand: the same laws have exceptions, quite strict and limited, even relative to the comunicacino periods of preservation of the data, there are other interests priority community such data sources or include them in the bublic listings, or Database Central Bank credit data, or characteristics determined by law. For the exception is pblicos make the data of your credit responsibility of persons (Defaults etc.) for a specified period, for protection of the financial market stability. There are also other regarding FIELDS certain, but omitted to focus on the subject, in ESTN laws. In the specific case raised from the declaration, the exencin occurs to protect interests of records, given their difficulties in meeting legal standards, according to the statement made by the stakeholders. I think from the point of view of ICANN's good to know the laws, an issue that has already been studied in the EWG According mencionCarlton B. Aires last year. But it is also necessary to consider the specific reason and proposed target is a particular problem, referred to the Declaration dealing with the issue of establishing an adequate policy ICANN globally, that can address the needs of services offered without prejudice laws, but without assuming responsibilities questions that do not belong legally and without exemptions, in the specific case, impair the reliability, stability and security ICANN provides service to the community. Establishing the new AAR applicant's responsibilities and recorder, which, by exencin procedure referring to the Declaration under study, Free registration to release the preservation of data. Aquhay solve a particular problem is not only in this Declaration on the matter on which they are made these comments. ICANN not you can free the parties to a legal obligation because it has powers for that.Try to solve the problem for hold serve reliably and safely, mxime with the new risks involved new gTLDs. But it is not and never was the owner of the base or that receives and handles the data or maintains. That was an obligation to the applicant, who will pay for manage the domain and is entitled to claim that you pay as legal. Also the applicant has in turn obligation to provide and update data. That "bottom-up" system applies regarding the as cooperation and responsibility for system operation global, because who is the owner of the data is the one I estprotegido by the system, usually more interested in protecting their data, and ms that can directly contribute them in the minimum time. On the issue of liability, which is the game who are in the Records if you're seeing, it is very clear who they are the responsible and qu. Whether the new RAA (Registracin Agreements) In other cases even legal exemptions to the preservation of data personal, for example in Uruguay, with regard to the credit bureau credit that mencionantes, expressly provides that persons physically challenged and legal bodies of the system of financial intermediation that provide the information contained in a Central Credit Risk by the Central Bank of Uruguay Sern responsible for the Nicaraguan Upgrading and veracity thereof. The database takes the Central Bank, which is a third, but remains clearly not responsible for the content of the database because only maintains a computer system based on data that are provided. This is this responsibility who are game, which is governed by the logic of justice to answer for their own acts or dependent. The Bank responds the proper functioning of the computer system holding database online. I understand that in the case of ICANN, any exencin be made, it should be expressly stated that ICANN does not assume responsibility for any reglamacin that might arise in this regard. This I can not overemphasize importance to ICANN interspblico defense and compliance their own purposes. The problem arises reason of the complexity added by the incorporation of new gTLDs, which increases exponentially the administration and management of a much larger amount of data, which means reception, control data quality, conservation, modification processes where appropriate, or if cancelacin. The way in which regulates Now mejorarindidablemente the quality of data and service general. The position of the records before this is trying to break free from the complexity and in the case of the obligation of preservation of data Ass have these problems and these responsibilities, but ms delegacin there, ICANN is not and never was the owner of the database are as earlier records responsible recoleccin as both the conservation. The interest of ICANN, is not the same as the registers, it is more Overall, properly and safely administer and reliable the Internet and all domains. Must be address the interests and PARTS AND needs of all involved, it is in their own funciny purpose. In this case, ICANN requires desempear While function that has the good of the Internet community, not to their benefit particular works for the same network security to be generated and the fewest conflicts: accurate, relevant data, not excessive, in a timely manner ...quality and quantity of data, delete data Erroneous, extemporneos, conserve the time necessary for to better fulfill its function. The records remain responsible base as always, they can handle in maintaining recolecciny data, but a specialized service that supports them so that they can better meet its function in the new era and these new domains. What is outsourced to improve is a part of their work, which is part of * your * business. This is not a criticism, but simply the situation is in fact what we are expressing. I understand why estbien the Declaration, agree with it and with trying those who are responsible and have its economic advantage in activity they provide, also comply with the rules properly, and if ICANN internally exonerate the relationship of sb prejudice arise, ICANN is not OF ANY way responsible for the same, subsisting liability in those who have it legally. but although they involve higher costs. * I understand that this should be expressly stated and signed by both parties. * Otherwise injured party will be able to understand that by exempting ICANN registrars of the responsibility is on keychain subrogating legal bodies consequences that may prepare for the registrars Failure to comply with the conservation of the data. Greetings to all The March 27, 2014, 0:58, Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> wrote: > Aída y todos. Nuestras leyes (Uruguay y Argentina), están inspiradas en la > LSI española, así que pueden diferir algo en la forma, pero no en el fondo. > La Ley Argentina de Protección de Datos Personales no habla de retención de > datos en comunicaciones. Sí, hubo una ley sobre este último tema, pero fue > dejada en "suspensión" por las numerosas críticas recibidas. > > La Ley argentina es la Nro 25326, que también define datos personales > (información de cualquier tipo referida a personas físicas o de existencia > ideal determinadas o determinables; y Datos sensibles ( Datos personales > que revelan origen racial y étnico, opiniones políticas, convicciones > religiosas, filosóficas o morales, afiliación sindical e información > referente a la salud o a la vida sexual). > > También define "Tratamiento de datos: Operaciones y procedimientos > sistemáticos, electrónicos o no, que permitan la recolección, conservación, > ordenación, almacenamiento, modificación, relacionamiento, evaluación, > bloqueo, destrucción, y en general el procesamiento de datos personales, > así como también su cesión a terceros a través de comunicaciones, > consultas, interconexiones o transferencias." > > Respecto de la seguridad de la información, nuestra Ley dice: 1. El > responsable o usuario del archivo de datos debe adoptar las medidas > técnicas y organizativas que resulten necesarias para garantizar la > seguridad y confidencialidad de los datos personales, de modo de evitar su > adulteración, pérdida, consulta o tratamiento no autorizado, y que permitan > detectar desviaciones, intencionales o no, de información, ya sea que los > riesgos provengan de la acción humana o del medio técnico utilizado. > > 2. Queda prohibido registrar datos personales en archivos, registros o > bancos que no reúnan condiciones técnicas de integridad y seguridad. > > Respecto de la confidencialidad: 1. El responsable y las personas que > intervengan en cualquier fase del tratamiento de datos personales están > obligados al secreto profesional respecto de los mismos. Tal obligación > subsistirá aun después de finalizada su relación con el titular del archivo > de datos. > > 2. El obligado podrá ser relevado del deber de secreto por resolución > judicial y cuando medien razones fundadas relativas a la seguridad pública, > la defensa nacional o la salud pública. > > Respecto de la Cesión de Datos: 1. Los datos personales objeto de > tratamiento sólo pueden ser cedidos para el cumplimiento de los fines > directamente relacionados con el interés legítimo del cedente y del > cesionario y con el previo consentimiento del titular de los datos, al que > se le debe informar sobre la finalidad de la cesión e identificar al > cesionario o los elementos que permitan hacerlo. > > Luego de esta larga introducción, debo coincidir contigo prácticamente en > todo. > > Entiendo que tanto un Registrador como un Registrante, tienen (o deberían > tener!) una infraestructura tecnológica adecuada a las necesidades. Es > decir que tienen un adecuado sistema de seguridad de la información, con > separaciones entre sus servidores de áreas administrativas y de producción, > inclusive de desarrollo de sistemas si es que tienen esta área. Además de > su red interna de comunicaciones, separadas y sin posibilidad de acceso > entre las diferentes áreas, elemental en un prestador de servicios de > internet. Esto, además de ajustarse a las leyes locales de protección de > datos personales. > > Esto implicaría, por ejemplo, que los elementos de datos descriptos en > los puntos 1.1.8 (Procesamiento de pagos recurrentes); y el 1.2.1. > (Información relativa a pagos concurrentes), están resguardados en un lugar > diferente a los elementos de datos del Whois, con lo cual el acceso a los > mismos es solo posible, libre para este último, y por personal interno del > registrador o registrante a la información de los precitados ítems, que > contienen asociados nombres, tarjetas de crédito, domicilios, etc. Se > afirma que si se suprime la fuente de información de pago, un registrante > no tendrá manera de evaluar los reclamos de disputa de facturación o > devoluciones del cargo del proceso. Que en muchos casos en disputa con > tarjetas de crédito o cargos bancarios. > > Esto está relacionado con la legislación de cada país. En Argentina, las > tarjetas de crédito y los bancos tienen la obligación de guardar este tipo > de información durante muchos años; en este momento no recuerdo si son > siete o diez años. De ser así, existen al menos dos lugares con la > información necesaria. > > > > Con respecto a los temas de hackeo, venta irregular de dominio por engaño > del comprador,etc., se habla de un año o más de retención de datos. Este > plazo tiene que tener relación con la prescripción del delito cometido, > porque si prescribe a los dos años, no debo guardarlos por tres años. > > Entiendo que no se fijen plazos de retención, porque este tema ha sido y > sigue siendo muy discutido por que requiere almacenamiento, medidas de > seguridad adicionales, etc. Y más aún siendo datos de tráfico. > > > > Espero no haber aburrido > > Saludos cordiales > > > > Alberto Soto > > > > *De:* Aida Noblia [mailto:aidanoblia@gmail.com] > *Enviado el:* miércoles, 26 de marzo de 2014 04:55 p.m. > *Para:* Alberto Soto > *CC:* Fatima Cambronero; LACRALO Español > > *Asunto:* Re: [lac-discuss-es] RV: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- > ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data > Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > > > Fátima, Alberto, Alejandro y todos: > > > > Entiendo que sí es un tema muy importante, complejo y también en las > legislaciones, no pude asistir a la mesa redonda que mencionó Fátima, se > puede escuchar alguna grabación? todavía queda algo de plazo para > comentarios ? no tengo claro cuál es la fecha de cierre de comentarios. > > > > Las legislaciones nacionales sobre protección de datos personales son > bastante estrictas, también las de derecho de acceso a la información > pública, porque ahí estaría el límite necesario para saber lo que se puede > y debe publicar y lo que no, con qué extensión, por cuánto tiempo, quiénes > pueden hacerlo, qué datos se pueden publicar líbremente y cuáles requieren > el consentimiento libre, expreso, escrito, del titular... > > > > En Uruguay la ley 18331 y sus decretos reglamentarios refieren a la > protección de datos personales (calificados en dos tipos (sensibles o no) > ,como un derecho humano amparado por la constitución de la República. Se > otorga al titular de los datos personales los derechos ARCO, sigla que a > nivel de las legislaciones incluye derecho de Acceso a la base de datos, > Rectificación de los datos erróneos o modificados en la realidad, > Corrección de datos erróneos o inexactos y Oposición a que se haga lo que > la ley llama "tratamiento" de los datos que es en general cualquier uso de > esos datos personales, sin el consentimiento escrito y expreso de su > titular. > > > > Hay una Unidad Reguladora de Registro y Control de esos datos a cargo de > la Agencia del Gobierno Electrónico, que lleva el Registro de las Bases > que contienen datos personales, obligatorio para todo el que tiene una > base, ya sea de personas públicas o privadas, controla, realiza > procedimientos y auditorías y sanciona a los infractores con multas e > incluso clausura de la base de datos. > > > > Hay un responsable de la base y un encargado de llevarla en la práctica > por cuenta de terceros o la suya propia. La ley regula sus > responsabilidades. El propietario de la base, persona física o jurídica es > el que responde por el uso o tratamiento de los datos personales al > titular de esos datos. > > > > Aún cuando se puedan usar o tratar en determinadas circunstancias, con > consentimiento del titular o en los casos de datos que se admita su > tratamiento sin él, los datos personales no pueden ser usados para otros > fines que para los que el titular su uso permitió. > > > > El responsable de la base es su propietario o quien decide su uso: Los > datos personales son recolectados para una finalidad y deben ser > eliminados una vez que se cumplió la finalidad para la que se recolectaron, > se pueden trasmitir solo en determinadas condiciones.. etc. Es ese > responsable de la base, que puede ser persona física o jurídica, a quien el > titular de los datos puede exigir el cumplimiento o las sanciones que > puedan corresponder. > > > > Con variantes, esto se repite en las legislaciones. En caso de > transferencia internacional de datos se aplica el derecho internacional, y > por tanto habrá que analizar cuál es la ley aplicable y la jurisdicción > competencia. > > > > > > En el caso de ICANN, el propietario de la base de datos *no* es ICANN, > por tanto, *no *es responsable legalmente del tratamiento que se realice > de los datos personales. > > > > Según pude ver, en el sistema del nuevo acuerdo, el servicio se terceriza, > para mejorarlo en cuanto a la calidad de los datos y también respecto a su > tratamiento, pero eso no implica el cambio de propietario. > > > > Entonces, ICANN consiente la "excención" de retención de datos, en > algunos casos puntuales que analiza y mediante un procedimiento especial, > pero perjudicando el servicio que se pretendía mejorar a los usuarios por > este nuevo medio. > > > > Esto se hace a pedido de los registros para quedar liberados de su > responsabilidad legal porque al no tener que conservar los datos según el > acuerdo con ICANN ya no tienen que responder ante la ley por su > conservación, deterioro, mal uso, etc. Se insiste en la exigencia de la > buena fe por parte del propietario o titular de la base de datos (registro) > que contiene dichos datos, aunque esta buena fe es un asunto de difícil > prueba cierta. > > > > Además, al no conservar estos datos, se impide que haya posibilidades > cumplir las funciones de ICANN en estos casos, respecto a la prevención de > daños que se puedan ocasionar por uso indebido de nombres de dominio y > similares. > > > > > > El tema es analizar en cada caso de estas solicitudes, si realmente la > retención de estos datos es necesaria para la prestación del servicio que > se brinda a través del Registro o si ella constituye una violación de la > ley. En el blog que se mencionan los casos que se pueden dar y no parecen > tan raros. Y la posición de los registradores es claramente buscar que se > les facilite su tarea. pero en este caso podría ser contra la efectividad y > certeza del servicio que brinda ICANN. De lo que ya se ha dado y se puede > ver en la web, parece que predomina la seguridad. Pero más allá de los > requisitos de presentación que tiene el caso (con informes de abogado , etc > ) debería estudiarse muy bien en que casos se da y no tanto presumir la > buena fe como forma de resolver estos casos. > > > > De otro modo por dar un respaldo a los propietarios de los Registros los > libera de responsabilidades legales, con riesgo de afectar el cumplimiento > de otras obligaciones, todo a afectar otras obligaciones que tiene el > Registro y su propietario como dueño o quien trata los datos. > > > > Como decían me parece un asunto de interés. > > > > > > Saludos > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-03-22 20:59 GMT-03:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org>: > > > > Fátima, solo serán las 04:00 AM en Buenos Aires... Pero prometo participar. > > Gracias!! > > > > Alberto Soto > > > > De: Fatima Cambronero [mailto:fatimacambronero@gmail.com] > Enviado el: sábado, 22 de marzo de 2014 08:54 p.m. > Para: Alberto Soto > CC: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; LACRALO Español > Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] RV: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN > > Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements > and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > > Alejandro, Alberto, > > > > Comparto la opinión de que estamos frente a un tema interesante que > deberíamos poder analizar y pronunciarnos desde nuestra región. > > > > El día lunes 24 a las 15 hs. local de Singapur está prevista una Mesa > Redonda sobre Servicios de Directorio de Registro: presente y futuro. Si > bien este tema concretamente no está incluido en la agenda de la reunión, > es > un tema muy relacionado que quizás aparezca en los debates. > > > > Sería bueno participar en esta Mesa Redonda para escuchar y discutir los > comentarios que pueda haber al respecto. Entiendo que en el horario de > nuestros países queda en una franja un poco complicada. Yo voy a estar > atendiendo a dicha reunión. Si hay algún comentario o consulta que quieran > hacer llegar, me ofrezco para transmitirlos. > > > > Este es el enlace a la agenda de esta Mesa Redonda: > > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Roundtable+on+Registrat > ion+Directory+Services%3A+Now+and+the+Future+-+2014.03.24+-+Singapore > > > > Aquí el enlace al Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/sin49-vip/ > (este es el mismo para todas las reuniones de At-Large de la semana). > > > > Saludos cordiales, > > Fatima Cambronero > > > > 2014-03-21 23:40 GMT-03:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org > > <mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org> >: > > > Creo que el interés debe ser suficiente. Es justamente uno de los temas > que > hacen a la existencia de entidades orientadas al usuario final de Internet, > es decir, NOSOTROS. > Con seguridad hay distintas legislaciones para cada país, al menos en > algunos ítems sustanciales. Aunque hay países que aún no tienen > legislación. > Hay 30 días para comentarios, es poco tiempo para la importancia del tema. > Sugiero que muy rápidamente las respectivas ALSs de cada país de nuestra > Región, lea los antecedentes de esta referencia, y luego informen la > legislación vigente en su respectivo país, con comentarios. También sugiero > que para esta primera fase, la fecha límite sea el próximo viernes > 28/03/2014. > También sugiero que quienes están participando en Singapur, sean eximidos > de > participar, tienen cosas muy importante que hacer por nosotros. > > Saludos cordiales > > Alberto Soto > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > [mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> ] En nombre de Dr. > Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Enviado el: viernes, 21 de marzo de 2014 11:25 p.m. > Para: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Asunto: [lac-discuss-es] RV: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN > Seeks > > Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and > Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > Colegas, > > el llamado anexo puede tener implicaciones legales apreciables en nuestra > región. Convoquemos a los expertos en protección de datos personales y > otros > temas relacionados con la retención de datos (cómputo forense, leyes de > telecomunicaciones, Marco Civil en el caso particular de Brasil) para > conformar una opinión sólida, si hay el interés suficiente. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > ________________________________________ > Desde: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > [alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > <mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> ] en nombre de > ICANN > At-Large > Staff [staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> ] Enviado > > el: viernes, 21 de marzo de 2014 > 20:00 > Hasta: ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Asunto: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Seeks Public Comment on > 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data Elements and Legitimate Purposes > for Collection and Retention > > [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> > News Alert > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-21mar14-en.htm > > ________________________________ > ICANN Seeks Public Comment on 2013 RAA Data Retention Specification Data > Elements and Legitimate Purposes for Collection and Retention > > 21 March 2014 > > ICANN has been in discussions with a number of Registrars regarding data > retention waiver requests ("Waiver Requests") submitted under the 2013 > Registrar Accreditation Agreement (the "2013 RAA"). Some Registrars are > seeking an exemption from certain collection and/or retention requirements > under the Data Retention Specification (the "Specification") of the 2013 > RAA. Section 2 of the Data Retention Specification sets forth requirements > regarding the written materials a Registrar must submit in support of its > good faith determination that the collection and/or retention of any data > element specified in the Specification violates applicable law, and > provides > that following notice to ICANN of the Waiver Request, ICANN and the > applicable Registrar shall discuss the matter in good faith in an effort to > reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the matter. An update on the 2013 > RAA and the data retention waiver process can be found here: > > http://blog.icann.org/2014/02/update-on-2013-raa-and-data-retention-waiver-p > > < > http://blog.icann.org/2014/02/update-on-2013-raa-and-data-retention-waiver- > process/> > > rocess/ > > ICANN understands that personal data should be treated in accordance with > applicable data protection laws, which generally permit gathering and > retention of personal data for legitimate purpose(s). ICANN also > understands > that the law may vary from country to country as to (i) what is considered > a > legitimate purpose, (ii) whether the personal data is adequate, relevant > and > not excessive in relation to the legitimate purpose for which they are > collected and (iii) for how long certain data elements may be retained. In > other words, what is considered a legitimate purpose for collection of > certain data in one country may not be considered a legitimate purpose in > another country. > > During ICANN's discussions in an effort to reach a mutually acceptable > resolution of the matter, some Registrars have requested that ICANN (a) > clarify and better define certain data elements described in the Data > Retention Specification that the Registrars maintain are not clearly > defined; and (b) describe potentially legitimate purposes for collection > and > retention of each data element that would help provide guidance for > Registrars both as to whether such elements may be lawfully collected, and, > if so, for how long such elements might lawfully be retained. > > In response to these requests from some Registrars, ICANN is posting for > public comment a document seeking to clarify what is meant by certain data > elements described in the Data Retention Specification and describing > potentially legitimate purposes for collection and retention of those data > elements. That document can be found > here< > http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/draft-data-retention-s > > < > http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/draft-data-retention-spec- > elements-21mar14-en.pdf> > > pec-elements-21mar14-en.pdf> [PDF, 116 KB]. The document will be posted for > a period of thirty (30) days to seek feedback and input from the community > on (i) whether the data elements are appropriately described, (ii) whether > the cited purposes for collection and retention are appropriate and > legitimate, and (iii) whether there are other potentially legitimate > purposes for collection and retention of such data elements. After the > thirty (30) day period following this posting has expired, ICANN will > consider all feedback and input received in connection with ICANN's ongoing > discussions to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of Waiver Requests. > In > the interim, ICANN will continue its ongoing discussions to reach a > mutually > acceptable resolution of Waiver Requests with individual Registrars with > the > goal of granting additional Waiver Requests as and when appropriate. > > A public comment period will remain open until 23:59 p.m. PDT/California, > 21 > April 2014. Public comments will be available for consideration by ICANN > staff and the ICANN Board. > > * Comments can be posted to: > comments-retention-21mar14(a)icann.org > <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann.org> > > <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann > > <mailto:comments-retention-21mar14@icann> > .org> > * Comments can be viewed at: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-retention-21mar14/ > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC-Announce mailing list > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > <mailto:lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > > -- > > Fatima Cambronero > > Abogada-Argentina > > Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 > Twitter: @facambronero > Skype: fatima.cambronero > > Join the LACRALO/ICANN discussions: > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > > Join the Diplo Internet Governance Community discussions: > > http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/ > > Join to the Internet Society (ISOC): http://www.internetsociety.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > > > -- > Aida Noblia > Aida Noblia _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/bfbfdd31e0.html --]]

1 0

Fwd: Correction: March 2014 Election LACRALO
by hcarrascob＠gmail.com April 3, 2014

April 3, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Fwd: Correction: March 2014 Election LACRALO From: hcarrascob(a)gmail.com Estimates: Remember. Regards -------- Original Message -------- Delivered-To: hcarrascob(a)gmail.com Received: by 10.50.182.227 with SMTP id eh3csp237695igc; Thu, April 3 2014 12:06:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.102.39 with SMTP id fl7mr9314001pab.43.1396552002208; Thu, April 3rd 2014 12:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Received: from EXPFE100-2.exc.icann.org (expfe100-2.exc.icann.org [ERROR: Sentence too long to translate (2364> 1800 bytes).] Hello Alberto and Humberto, I hope your day has been going well. My name is Ariel Liang, the At-Large Policy Coordinator. It is nice to virtually meet you. I was Informed That There is a country-related coefficient calculation error in the past LACRALO Election. I have checked the vote results That several times and confirm the country coefficients of all ALS Representatives are correct expect for That of Carlos Alberto Watson Carazo. The weight of his vote Should be 3.13 instead of 6.25. I have PDF documents created (attached) showing where the Error Occurs, as well as correcting the mistake. Also I have an addendum to the Drafted Vote Result (below) That You May Consider Publicizing via the mailing LACRALO list. Sincerely apologize for the mistake and the inconvenience May cause you. Thank you, Ariel ** Dear All, In the interests of transparency, the Chair and Secretariat are LACRALO Obliged to report an error in calculating the weighted vote for the preferred candidates to serve as Chair and Secretariat LACRALO for the period 2014 to 2015. Alberto Soto is still the preferred candidate for Chair with LACRALO 43.49 instead of 46.61 weighted vote while Sergio Salinas Porto is unchanged at 28.65 weighted vote. Humberto Carrasco is still the preferred candidate for LACRALO 44.80 With the Secretariat unchanged while Juan Manuel weighted vote Rojas has 32.54 instead of 35.66 weighted vote. The reason for the mistake was due to an incorrect country coefficient ALS Assigned to the Following: * ISOC-CR Costa Rica Internet Society for Development - was 6.25 (Incorrect) instead of 3.13 (correct) Here is a PDF showing the incorrect calculations: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B10rrZn6kIB0OGhPRjBPQzVEeDg/edit?usp=shari… Here is a PDF showing the corrected results: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B10rrZn6kIB0N1JyUjcyV0FjbmM/edit?usp=shari… Apologies for the mistake. Kind Regards, Alberto Soto LACRALO Chair Humberto Carrasco LACRALO Secretariat [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/9678298c5a.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] R: R: VOTE RESULTS: 2014 Director-At-Large Board (Seat # 15) Selection Process
by apisanty＠gmail.com April 3, 2014

April 3, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: R: R: VOTE RESULTS: 2014 Director-At-Large Board (Seat # 15) Selection Process From: apisanty(a)gmail.com Adam, this reply of mine will only go to some lists (it is too much cross-posted.) Your admission in the last sentence is the key to Simplifying this discussion of the ICANN NomCom and giving it some realistic focus. You say that you felt Often Inadequate in judging the Merits of candidates Who were way above your capacity. You Should Have resigned one at that very moment but let's skip That part and go into a more overall statement. The design of the NomCom Which foresaw an Implementation in every community That Designates members of the NomCom would send a "senior statesperson" someone who would exert stewardship over the Greater Good, without That disregarding communities' own interests and driving principles. In practice this failed to happen.Instead faq frequently the communities Designated non-independent, junior people who had to prove Their merit to the community in the NomCom and Could hope for some reward later on. This breakdown in trust and resignation of stewardship has-been toxic. There is nothing That can be written in the rules That can cause change towards a stewardship and trust-earning model. It has to be the action of That the community itself begins thinking less of how to get a larger size of the foot and more of how to make the pie better. That Therefore I think this is the worst of times for a major rethink of the NomCom and other Processes That Get Directors to the Board. May Change be needed, though what change is needed is a very open discussion. But the thing to focus on right now is the substitution of the NTIA's function, nothing more. If That IMPLIES These other changes must be very convincing. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Thu, April 3rd, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Adam Peake <ajp(a)glocom.ac.jp> wrote: > I've been involved in NomCom far too many times :-) And each year the > community was asked for input on the criteria. > > ICANN is a large and complex organization: having experience of complex > organizations, budgets, strategic planning, it part of the job. Doesn't > mean it has to be a person's only skill, but in a broad aggregate it needs > to be present. And smart people will learn, but you don't want too many > learning on the job when they are voting on issues that affect millions and > $millions. Look at the people NomCom has appointed. There's only one that > fits the pure "large corporate board" category. > > Selection of NomCom members does need more thought. I often felt a fraud > judging people on criteria I myself had little or no experience of. > > Adam > > > On Apr 4, 2014, at 12:31 AM, Roberto Gaetano wrote: > > > Carlton, > > > > I completely agree with you, the criteria given to NomCom have to be > > thoroughly revised. > > > > Experience on "large corporate boards" has been an indication given to > > NomCom in the past, but I believe that one of the key words in the ideal > > Director profile is "in aggregate". > > > > This means that while ideally a Director has to have an incredible > knowledge > > and experience, this is meant in the sense that the Board, as a whole, > needs > > to have this wealth of knowledge and experience, not necessarily each and > > every Director. So, it might well be that at certain moments there is not > > enough large corporate boards experience on the Board, and it will be > > legitimate to look for reinforcing this aspect, but this does not mean > that > > all candidates that do not have such item in the profile should be > > discarded. To make an example, if "large corporate boards" is a need, > > "non-profit boards" is well another one. > > > > So the two big questions are: > > > > - How to cefine the requirements for NomCom > > > > - How to select the NomCom members (i.e. is the current > mechanism > > the best one?) > > > > Cheers, > > > > Roberto > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Da: Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com] > > Inviato: mercoledì 2 aprile 2014 02:56 > > A: Roberto Gaetano > > Cc: Sivasubramanian M; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; > > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; Spanish version of lac-discuss; > > Discussion for At-Large Europe; afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > Discuss; At-Large Announcements; APRALO; At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss > > Oggetto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] R: [EURO-Discuss] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] > > VOTE RESULTS: 2014 At-Large Board Director (Seat #15) Selection Process > > > > > > > > Roberto: > > > > I too believe what you're proposing is not just sensible but strategic > and > > in the overarching At-Large interest. > > > > > > > > Maybe its because of my position that on principle, I simply cannot > accept > > that in matters of governance and when part of a distant group and with > > respect to decision-making, the representative should be obliged to 'take > > the whip' - meaning follow the instructions - of his/her group. This is > my > > position regardless of the size of the electorate; whether popularly > elected > > or not, I have greats doubts that one can ever be confined & judged as > truly > > reflecting the wishes of the constituency. > > > > > > > > Indeed at the onset, a few of us thought the liaison role properly > > configured may likely have a more sustainable interest for the At-Large > than > > the single voting director. So while we are largely agreed, I have one > > quibble with your characterisation of the role of the NomCom; that set of > > criteria utilised for selection of directors. > > > > > > > > In your estimation of this new role for the Board, I would hope that > space > > for more guidance is calculated so there is a balance in criteria between > > persons having experience on 'large corporate boards' than those without. > > And I say this in context of likely interpretation of the meaning of > > 'large'. For depending on who defines 'large', a whole set of likely > > participants from my side of the world will enter the process already > > disadvantaged. And that does not augur well for participation at that > level > > for those of us at the edge of empire. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > -Carlton > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================== > > Carlton A Samuels > > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround > > ============================= > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Roberto Gaetano > > <roberto_gaetano(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > I have been one of the champions of the ALAC representation to the Board > > with voting Directors, on par with the other supporting organizations. > > So I believe that I cannot be suspected of anti-ALAC-ism if I now, years > > later, argue that to fight for more Directors on the Board is a battle of > > the past, that has little meaning looking at the evolution of the > > organizazion and at a full realization of the multi-stakeholder model. > > The multi-stakeholder model is not a parliamentarian model where the > > stakeholder will get representation based on their relative "strength". > The > > parliamentarian scheme is OK for an organization in its infancy, where > the > > constitution has to be drafted. In a mature organization, with basic laws > > and behaviours already defined, the appointment of representatives by > > constituencies inevitably brings in the Board the petty interests of the > > different constituencies instead of having a sort of council of the > elders > > that abstracts from the contingent interests looking for the common good. > > This has been the guideline that was attempted with the GNSO Review, > albeit > > with only partial, although significant, results. > > It is time to propose a different model for the Board as well, to get > rid as > > much as possible of the system by which we have representative of > "parties" > > that often have conflicting interests. > > I believe that we should go towards reducing the SO-appointed Directors, > and > > have instead a larger share, possibly a super-majority, appointed by > NomCom. > > The NomCom should also get a precise description of the skill set that is > > missing for that particular year, so that they can choose the names > > accordingly. > > Cheers, > > Roberto > > > > > > > >> -----Messaggio originale----- > >> Da: euro-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:euro-discuss- > >> bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] Per conto di Sivasubramanian M > >> Inviato: domenica 30 marzo 2014 18:27 > >> A: Kleinwächter, Wolfgang > >> Cc: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; lac-discuss-es@atlarge- > >> lists.icann.org; euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > > afri-discuss@atlarge- > >> lists.icann.org; At-Large Announcements; APRALO; At-Large Worldwide; > na- > >> discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> Oggetto: Re: [EURO-Discuss] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] VOTE RESULTS: 2014 > > > >> At-Large Board Director (Seat #15) Selection Process > >> > > > >> Dear Wolfgang, > >> > >> The original idea of nine Voting Directors was possibly conceived to > > ensure an > >> independent, user driven organization. NomCom was a good idea, but in > the > >> process At-Large lost the seats in the Board, in exchange for shared > >> responsibility in the selection process. > >> > >> A better representation for At-Large, as originally envisaged, would > > positively > >> demonstrate that ICANN Governance is emphatically based on the multi- > >> stakeholder model of Governance. > >> > >> In the recent At-Large elections, we have had an effective incumbent and > >> four other qualified candidates, which goes on to prove that At-Large > has > >> matured, has people sufficiently qualified for Board positions. As you > > have > >> mentioned, we have the GNSO user communities with qualified people, > >> which increases the the number of available qualified candidates even > > more. > >> In this context, if we revisit the discussions on more Board seats which > > would > >> reaffirm ICANN's faith in the multi-stakeholder model. Other > Stakeholders > >> might welcome such a discussion to improve user participation in the > > Board, > >> because it would essentially improve Trust in the ICANN process. > >> > >> More candidates from At-Large to Board positions could be appointed by > two > >> different processes: > >> > >> 1) By the existing process whereby the AC selects / elects a candidate > > and > >> the chosen person is appointed. This introduces an election which could > >> sometimes create differences, though such differences do not exist > within > >> this AC at the moment. > >> > >> 2) By a process completely free of the Internal elections, by an > internal > >> NomCom. (initial thoughts, there are various ways of designing such a > >> process, there are advantages and disadvantages to be considered) > >> > >> Thank you. > >> > >> Sivasubramanian M > >> India > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:32 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" < > >> wolfgang.kleinwaechter(a)medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I also want to join the many thanks to Sebastian (great job), to > >>> Rinalia (great challenge) and Roberto and Tijani (well done). Nothing > >>> more to add what Veronica has said so nicely and well structured. > >>> > >>> I this context: DonŽt forget the History. In the present NTIA > >>> transition discussion a lot of "orginal ideas" from 1998 are > >>> remembered. One orginal idea was to give the At Large Membership nine > >>> voting seats. Article V, Section 4 of the Orginal Bylaws (November 6, > >>> 1998) said in para. iv: "Nine > >>> (9) At Large Directors, selected pursuant to a process to be > >>> established by a majority vote of all the At Large Board members of the > >> Initial Board". > >>> http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws/bylaws-06nov98- > >> en.htm# > >>> V > >>> > >>> We know the history. Five voting directors were elected in 2000 for > >>> two years. In November 2001 the At Large Membership Committee, > >> chaired > >>> by Carl Bildt, recommended the establishment of an At Large Supporting > >>> Organisation > >>> (ALSO) with the right to send six voting directors to the board. > >>> > >>> http://archive.icann.org/en/committees/at-large/final-report-05nov01.h > >>> tm#_toc523422641 > >>> > >>> In 2002, as part of the general ICANN reform process the ideas of an > >>> At Large elections and the establishment of an ALSO with six regional > >>> councils were abolished and were substituted by an "At Large Advisory > >> Committee" > >>> (ALAC) with five RALOs, a certification process for ALSs and the > >>> establishment of a NomCon which now sends eight directors to the > >>> board. The NomCom got five voting At Large Members. The chair of ALAC > >>> was invited to serve as a non-votong liaison in the Board (similar to > >>> the chair of the GAC). > >>> > >>> In the preparation for ATLAS I in Mexico in 2008 we were calling for > >>> two voting ALAC Board members. We got one. Now ATLAS II is at the > >>> horizon. We need a strong message from ATLAS II that the > >>> multistakeholder model - which is now under tough discussion and has > >>> to face its "moment of truth" - will work only, if you have a strong > >>> civil society role in policy development and decision making. > >>> > >>> Here we have to invest more how to do this and to go out of our silos > >>> both within the broader CS community (in particular with NCUC and > >>> NPOC) as well as in cross constituency communication, coordination and > >> collaboration with > >>> private sector, technical community and governments. A big challenge. > >>> > >>> Wolfgang > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> wolfgang > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________ > >>> > >>> Von: euro-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org im Auftrag von > >>> Veronica Cretu > >>> Gesendet: Sa 29.03.2014 15:55 > >>> An: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond > >>> Cc: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > >>> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > >>> euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > >>> afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > >>> ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > >>> apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; At-Large Worldwide; > >>> na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >>> Betreff: Re: [EURO-Discuss] [At-Large] VOTE RESULTS: 2014 At-Large > >>> Board Director (Seat #15) Selection Process > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Dear colleagues, dear Olivier - thanks for this message and to echo > >>> and build up on it, I would also like to: > >>> > >>> - Thank *Sebastian* for the work done in his capacity as a member of > >>> the Board and wish him success in the upcoming new roles and > >>> initiatives. We all continue building on our previous experiences, so > >>> this process should be a continuous exercise and include those who can > >>> learn from us - so, I am sure Sebastian will find good ways to share > >>> the wealth of expertise gained in his role as a Board member and > >>> continue serve the community in the best possible ways. > >>> > >>> - Congratulate *Rinalia* for being elected to the Board and wish her > >>> much luck in this interesting, yet, challenging new role. These are > >>> important times for ICANN which will require several key competences, > >>> and awareness of geo-political realities in different parts of the > >>> world. I trust Rinalia will be able to deliver on the expectations on > > the > >> community-at-large. > >>> > >>> - Thank *Roberto* for the wonderful leadership of the BCEC - it has > >>> been for me, personally, a great experience. Like in any experience > >>> there are always things to learn from and improve based on the input > > from > >> members. > >>> > >>> On this note, hope everyone attending ICANN 49 managed to return home > >>> safe & sound, otherwise, wishing you safe travels back home! > >>> > >>> With very best, > >>> Veronica > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond > >>> <ocl(a)gih.com > >>>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Dear All, > >>>> > >>>> I wanted to extend my congratulations to Rinalia Abdul Rahim in what > >>>> was a very balanced election that required many rounds to > >>>> differentiate the candidates. > >>>> > >>>> Rinalia has been selected by our community to sit on the Board at a > >>>> moment that is not only crucial for At-Large but also crucial for > >>>> ICANN as a whole. She will take her seat at the 2014 ICANN Annual > >>>> General Meeting - the last meeting of the year - which will take > >>>> place in Los Angeles. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks to all of the candidates who have run for the position. It is > >>>> through a wide candidate list that we can assure a wider choice of > >>>> options for the future of our community. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks to Roberto Gaetano and the Board Candidate Evaluation > >> Committee. > >>>> Their work has been crucial in providing a first class short-list of > >>>> candidates. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks to Tijani Ben Jemaa and the Board Member Selection Process > >>>> Committee for their stewardship of a process that has been > >>>> challenging due to the multiple instances of Ties. > >>>> > >>>> The work of these Committees is not over. They will analyse lessons > >>>> learnt and work together to provide the ALAC with an updated set of > >>>> recommendations to improve the selection process next time around. > >>>> > >>>> Finally, I would like to remind you that until the 2014 ICANN AGM, > >>>> the Board Member selected by At-Large is Sébastien Bachollet and > >>>> would like to reaffirm the full support of our community in the > >>>> challenging months ahead of us. We are well aware that he is not on > >>>> the Board to "represent us" but as a candidate from our community > >>>> selected to the Board by our community, he has proven himself to > >>>> share his experience of Internet End Users with his Board Colleagues > >>>> and we are grateful of his continued involvement in all matters of > > ICANN. > >>>> > >>>> Kindest regards, > >>>> > >>>> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond > >>>> ALAC Chair > >>>> > >>>> On 26/03/2014 15:06, ICANN At-Large Staff wrote: > >>>>> Dear All, > >>>>> > >>>>> Tijani Ben Jemaa, Chair of the Board Member Selection Process > >>>>> Committee > >>>> (BMSPC) 2014, has asked that an announcement on the final vote > >>>> results of the Board Director (Seat #15) selected by the > >>>> ALAC/At-Large for 2015-2017 (to take their seat at the 2014 AGM) be > >> published. > >>>>> > >>>>> This is to inform you that the 2014 At-Large Board Director (Seat > >>>>> #15) > >>>> Selection Process was completed on 25-March-2014. > >>>>> > >>>>> Below is the list of candidates (listed in alphabetical order of > >>>>> the > >>>> family name) who ran for the position: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Rinalia Abdul Rahim > >>>>> * Sébastien Bachollet > >>>>> * Alan Greenberg > >>>>> * Evan Leibovitch > >>>>> * Jean-Jacques Subrenat > >>>>> > >>>>> After the FIRST ROUND VOTE and the SECOND ROUND's first vote, tie > >>>> breaking vote, and second (final) vote, the candidate who is > >>>> selected as the Board Director (Seat #15) by ALAC/At-Large for > >>>> 2015-2017 is: Rinalia Abdul Rahim. > >>>>> > >>>>> You may review the results, as well as the detailed information > >>>>> about > >>>> the selection procedure, under: https://community.icann.org/x/WinRAg. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> > >>>>> Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, > >>>>> Nathalie > >>>> Peregrine and Terri Agnew > >>>>> ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > >>>>> E-mail: <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org% > >>> 3cmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org > > <mailto:3cmailto%3Astaff@atlarge.icann.org> > > >>>> staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > >>>> > >>> <applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7- > >> B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi% > >>> > >> 20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20G > >>> isella%20Gruber,% > >>>> > >>> > >> 20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy > >> %20St > >>> aff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org > > <mailto: > aff%2520in%2520support%2520of%2520ALACmailto%3Astaff(a)atlarge.icann.o > > rg> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> At-Large mailing list > >>>>> At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > >>>>> > >>>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org < > >>> http://atlarge.icann.org/> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> EURO-Discuss mailing list > >>>> EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > >>>> > >>>> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > >>>> <http://www.euralo.org/> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> *Veronica Cretu * > >>> > >>> > >>> *President, Open Government Institute**Republic of Moldova > >>> - http://opengov.si.md/ <http://opengov.si.md/>* > >>> > >>> *Member of the Steering Committee, * > >>> *Open Government Partnership (OGP);* > >>> * > >>> http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role- > >> and-cu > >>> rrent-membership > >>> < > >>> http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role- > >> and-cu > >>> rrent-membership > >>>> * > >>> > >>> *Member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group* *To the Internet > >>> Governance Forum (IGF)* > >>> > >>> *http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/1549 > >>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>* > >>> > >>> *Member of the Nominating Committee of ICANN* *(Internet Corporation > >>> for Assigned Names and Numbering)* > >>> > >>> *http://www.icann.org/en/groups/nomcom/2014/members > >>> <http://www.icann.org< http://www.icann.org/> >* > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> *Email: veronicacretu(a)gmail.com <veronicacretu(a)gmail.com> and/or > >>> veronica(a)cretu.md <veronica(a)cretu.md>Skype: veronicacretu Phone: > >> 373 > >>> 067435000* > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> EURO-Discuss mailing list > >>> EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > >>> > >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > >>> <http://www.euralo.org/> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> APAC-Discuss mailing list > >>> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > >>> > >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy > >> India +91 99524 03099 <tel:%2B91%2099524%2003099> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> EURO-Discuss mailing list > >> EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > >> > >> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lac-discuss-es mailing list > > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EURO-Discuss mailing list > > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > --------------------------- Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM Faculty of Chemistry 3000 University Avenue, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD SMS +525541444475 +525541444475 FROM MEXICO Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Join the LinkedIn group UNAM, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---- >> Join ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/946b992de6.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] R: R: VOTE RESULTS: 2014 Director-At-Large Board (Seat # 15) Selection Process
by ajp＠glocom.ac.jp April 3, 2014

April 3, 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: R: R: VOTE RESULTS: 2014 Director-At-Large Board (Seat # 15) Selection Process From: ajp(a)glocom.ac.jp I've been involved in. NomCom far too many times :-) And each year the community was asked for input on the criteria. ICANN is a large and complex organization: Organizations having experience of complex, budgets, strategic planning, it part of the job. Does not mean it has to be a person's only skill, but in a broad aggregate it needs to be present. And smart people will learn, but you do not want too many learning on the job When They are voting on issues That Affect millions and $ millions. Look at the people you NomCom appointed. There's only one That fits the pure "large corporate board" category. Selection of NomCom members does need more thought. I felt a fraud on people judging criteria I myself had little or no experience of often. Adam On April 4, 2014, at 12:31 AM, Roberto Gaetano wrote: > Carlton, > > I completely agree with you, the criteria given to NomCom have to be > thoroughly revised. > > Experience on large corporate boards has been an indication given to > NomCom in the past, but I believe that one of the key words in the ideal > Director profile is in aggregate. > > This means that while ideally a Director has to have an incredible knowledge > and experience, this is meant in the sense that the Board, as a whole, needs > to have this wealth of knowledge and experience, not necessarily each and > every Director. So, it might well be that at certain moments there is not > enough large corporate boards experience on the Board, and it will be > legitimate to look for reinforcing this aspect, but this does not mean that > all candidates that do not have such item in the profile should be > discarded. To make an example, if large corporate boards is a need, > non-profit boards is well another one. > > So the two big questions are: > > - How to cefine the requirements for NomCom > > - How to select the NomCom members (i.e. is the current mechanism > the best one?) > > Cheers, > > Roberto > > > > > > > > Da: Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com] > Inviato: mercoledì 2 aprile 2014 02:56 > A: Roberto Gaetano > Cc: Sivasubramanian M; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; Spanish version of lac-discuss; > Discussion for At-Large Europe; afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Discuss; At-Large Announcements; APRALO; At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss > Oggetto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] R: [EURO-Discuss] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] > VOTE RESULTS: 2014 At-Large Board Director (Seat #15) Selection Process > > > > Roberto: > > I too believe what you're proposing is not just sensible but strategic and > in the overarching At-Large interest. > > > > Maybe its because of my position that on principle, I simply cannot accept > that in matters of governance and when part of a distant group and with > respect to decision-making, the representative should be obliged to 'take > the whip' - meaning follow the instructions - of his/her group. This is my > position regardless of the size of the electorate; whether popularly elected > or not, I have greats doubts that one can ever be confined & judged as truly > reflecting the wishes of the constituency. > > > > Indeed at the onset, a few of us thought the liaison role properly > configured may likely have a more sustainable interest for the At-Large than > the single voting director. So while we are largely agreed, I have one > quibble with your characterisation of the role of the NomCom; that set of > criteria utilised for selection of directors. > > > > In your estimation of this new role for the Board, I would hope that space > for more guidance is calculated so there is a balance in criteria between > persons having experience on 'large corporate boards' than those without. > And I say this in context of likely interpretation of the meaning of > 'large'. For depending on who defines 'large', a whole set of likely > participants from my side of the world will enter the process already > disadvantaged. And that does not augur well for participation at that level > for those of us at the edge of empire. > > > > Best, > > -Carlton > > > > > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround > ============================= > > > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Roberto Gaetano > <roberto_gaetano(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > I have been one of the champions of the ALAC representation to the Board > with voting Directors, on par with the other supporting organizations. > So I believe that I cannot be suspected of anti-ALAC-ism if I now, years > later, argue that to fight for more Directors on the Board is a battle of > the past, that has little meaning looking at the evolution of the > organizazion and at a full realization of the multi-stakeholder model. > The multi-stakeholder model is not a parliamentarian model where the > stakeholder will get representation based on their relative "strength". The > parliamentarian scheme is OK for an organization in its infancy, where the > constitution has to be drafted. In a mature organization, with basic laws > and behaviours already defined, the appointment of representatives by > constituencies inevitably brings in the Board the petty interests of the > different constituencies instead of having a sort of council of the elders > that abstracts from the contingent interests looking for the common good. > This has been the guideline that was attempted with the GNSO Review, albeit > with only partial, although significant, results. > It is time to propose a different model for the Board as well, to get rid as > much as possible of the system by which we have representative of "parties" > that often have conflicting interests. > I believe that we should go towards reducing the SO-appointed Directors, and > have instead a larger share, possibly a super-majority, appointed by NomCom. > The NomCom should also get a precise description of the skill set that is > missing for that particular year, so that they can choose the names > accordingly. > Cheers, > Roberto > > > >> -----Messaggio originale----- >> Da: euro-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:euro-discuss- >> bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] Per conto di Sivasubramanian M >> Inviato: domenica 30 marzo 2014 18:27 >> A: Kleinwächter, Wolfgang >> Cc: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; lac-discuss-es@atlarge- >> lists.icann.org; euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > afri-discuss@atlarge- >> lists.icann.org; At-Large Announcements; APRALO; At-Large Worldwide; na- >> discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Oggetto: Re: [EURO-Discuss] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] VOTE RESULTS: 2014 > >> At-Large Board Director (Seat #15) Selection Process >> > >> Dear Wolfgang, >> >> The original idea of nine Voting Directors was possibly conceived to > ensure an >> independent, user driven organization. NomCom was a good idea, but in the >> process At-Large lost the seats in the Board, in exchange for shared >> responsibility in the selection process. >> >> A better representation for At-Large, as originally envisaged, would > positively >> demonstrate that ICANN Governance is emphatically based on the multi- >> stakeholder model of Governance. >> >> In the recent At-Large elections, we have had an effective incumbent and >> four other qualified candidates, which goes on to prove that At-Large has >> matured, has people sufficiently qualified for Board positions. As you > have >> mentioned, we have the GNSO user communities with qualified people, >> which increases the the number of available qualified candidates even > more. >> In this context, if we revisit the discussions on more Board seats which > would >> reaffirm ICANN's faith in the multi-stakeholder model. Other Stakeholders >> might welcome such a discussion to improve user participation in the > Board, >> because it would essentially improve Trust in the ICANN process. >> >> More candidates from At-Large to Board positions could be appointed by two >> different processes: >> >> 1) By the existing process whereby the AC selects / elects a candidate > and >> the chosen person is appointed. This introduces an election which could >> sometimes create differences, though such differences do not exist within >> this AC at the moment. >> >> 2) By a process completely free of the Internal elections, by an internal >> NomCom. (initial thoughts, there are various ways of designing such a >> process, there are advantages and disadvantages to be considered) >> >> Thank you. >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> India >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:32 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" < >> wolfgang.kleinwaechter(a)medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I also want to join the many thanks to Sebastian (great job), to >>> Rinalia (great challenge) and Roberto and Tijani (well done). Nothing >>> more to add what Veronica has said so nicely and well structured. >>> >>> I this context: DonŽt forget the History. In the present NTIA >>> transition discussion a lot of "orginal ideas" from 1998 are >>> remembered. One orginal idea was to give the At Large Membership nine >>> voting seats. Article V, Section 4 of the Orginal Bylaws (November 6, >>> 1998) said in para. iv: "Nine >>> (9) At Large Directors, selected pursuant to a process to be >>> established by a majority vote of all the At Large Board members of the >> Initial Board". >>> http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws/bylaws-06nov98- >> en.htm# >>> V >>> >>> We know the history. Five voting directors were elected in 2000 for >>> two years. In November 2001 the At Large Membership Committee, >> chaired >>> by Carl Bildt, recommended the establishment of an At Large Supporting >>> Organisation >>> (ALSO) with the right to send six voting directors to the board. >>> >>> http://archive.icann.org/en/committees/at-large/final-report-05nov01.h >>> tm#_toc523422641 >>> >>> In 2002, as part of the general ICANN reform process the ideas of an >>> At Large elections and the establishment of an ALSO with six regional >>> councils were abolished and were substituted by an "At Large Advisory >> Committee" >>> (ALAC) with five RALOs, a certification process for ALSs and the >>> establishment of a NomCon which now sends eight directors to the >>> board. The NomCom got five voting At Large Members. The chair of ALAC >>> was invited to serve as a non-votong liaison in the Board (similar to >>> the chair of the GAC). >>> >>> In the preparation for ATLAS I in Mexico in 2008 we were calling for >>> two voting ALAC Board members. We got one. Now ATLAS II is at the >>> horizon. We need a strong message from ATLAS II that the >>> multistakeholder model - which is now under tough discussion and has >>> to face its "moment of truth" - will work only, if you have a strong >>> civil society role in policy development and decision making. >>> >>> Here we have to invest more how to do this and to go out of our silos >>> both within the broader CS community (in particular with NCUC and >>> NPOC) as well as in cross constituency communication, coordination and >> collaboration with >>> private sector, technical community and governments. A big challenge. >>> >>> Wolfgang >>> >>> >>> >>> wolfgang >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> Von: euro-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org im Auftrag von >>> Veronica Cretu >>> Gesendet: Sa 29.03.2014 15:55 >>> An: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond >>> Cc: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; >>> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; >>> euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; >>> afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; >>> ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; >>> apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; At-Large Worldwide; >>> na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> Betreff: Re: [EURO-Discuss] [At-Large] VOTE RESULTS: 2014 At-Large >>> Board Director (Seat #15) Selection Process >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear colleagues, dear Olivier - thanks for this message and to echo >>> and build up on it, I would also like to: >>> >>> - Thank *Sebastian* for the work done in his capacity as a member of >>> the Board and wish him success in the upcoming new roles and >>> initiatives. We all continue building on our previous experiences, so >>> this process should be a continuous exercise and include those who can >>> learn from us - so, I am sure Sebastian will find good ways to share >>> the wealth of expertise gained in his role as a Board member and >>> continue serve the community in the best possible ways. >>> >>> - Congratulate *Rinalia* for being elected to the Board and wish her >>> much luck in this interesting, yet, challenging new role. These are >>> important times for ICANN which will require several key competences, >>> and awareness of geo-political realities in different parts of the >>> world. I trust Rinalia will be able to deliver on the expectations on > the >> community-at-large. >>> >>> - Thank *Roberto* for the wonderful leadership of the BCEC - it has >>> been for me, personally, a great experience. Like in any experience >>> there are always things to learn from and improve based on the input > from >> members. >>> >>> On this note, hope everyone attending ICANN 49 managed to return home >>> safe & sound, otherwise, wishing you safe travels back home! >>> >>> With very best, >>> Veronica >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond >>> <ocl(a)gih.com >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear All, >>>> >>>> I wanted to extend my congratulations to Rinalia Abdul Rahim in what >>>> was a very balanced election that required many rounds to >>>> differentiate the candidates. >>>> >>>> Rinalia has been selected by our community to sit on the Board at a >>>> moment that is not only crucial for At-Large but also crucial for >>>> ICANN as a whole. She will take her seat at the 2014 ICANN Annual >>>> General Meeting - the last meeting of the year - which will take >>>> place in Los Angeles. >>>> >>>> Thanks to all of the candidates who have run for the position. It is >>>> through a wide candidate list that we can assure a wider choice of >>>> options for the future of our community. >>>> >>>> Thanks to Roberto Gaetano and the Board Candidate Evaluation >> Committee. >>>> Their work has been crucial in providing a first class short-list of >>>> candidates. >>>> >>>> Thanks to Tijani Ben Jemaa and the Board Member Selection Process >>>> Committee for their stewardship of a process that has been >>>> challenging due to the multiple instances of Ties. >>>> >>>> The work of these Committees is not over. They will analyse lessons >>>> learnt and work together to provide the ALAC with an updated set of >>>> recommendations to improve the selection process next time around. >>>> >>>> Finally, I would like to remind you that until the 2014 ICANN AGM, >>>> the Board Member selected by At-Large is Sébastien Bachollet and >>>> would like to reaffirm the full support of our community in the >>>> challenging months ahead of us. We are well aware that he is not on >>>> the Board to "represent us" but as a candidate from our community >>>> selected to the Board by our community, he has proven himself to >>>> share his experience of Internet End Users with his Board Colleagues >>>> and we are grateful of his continued involvement in all matters of > ICANN. >>>> >>>> Kindest regards, >>>> >>>> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond >>>> ALAC Chair >>>> >>>> On 26/03/2014 15:06, ICANN At-Large Staff wrote: >>>>> Dear All, >>>>> >>>>> Tijani Ben Jemaa, Chair of the Board Member Selection Process >>>>> Committee >>>> (BMSPC) 2014, has asked that an announcement on the final vote >>>> results of the Board Director (Seat #15) selected by the >>>> ALAC/At-Large for 2015-2017 (to take their seat at the 2014 AGM) be >> published. >>>>> >>>>> This is to inform you that the 2014 At-Large Board Director (Seat >>>>> #15) >>>> Selection Process was completed on 25-March-2014. >>>>> >>>>> Below is the list of candidates (listed in alphabetical order of >>>>> the >>>> family name) who ran for the position: >>>>> >>>>> * Rinalia Abdul Rahim >>>>> * Sébastien Bachollet >>>>> * Alan Greenberg >>>>> * Evan Leibovitch >>>>> * Jean-Jacques Subrenat >>>>> >>>>> After the FIRST ROUND VOTE and the SECOND ROUND's first vote, tie >>>> breaking vote, and second (final) vote, the candidate who is >>>> selected as the Board Director (Seat #15) by ALAC/At-Large for >>>> 2015-2017 is: Rinalia Abdul Rahim. >>>>> >>>>> You may review the results, as well as the detailed information >>>>> about >>>> the selection procedure, under: https://community.icann.org/x/WinRAg. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, >>>>> Nathalie >>>> Peregrine and Terri Agnew >>>>> ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC >>>>> E-mail: <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org% >>> 3cmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org > <mailto:3cmailto%3Astaff@atlarge.icann.org> > >>>> staff(a)atlarge.icann.org >>>> >>> <applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7- >> B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi% >>> >> 20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20G >>> isella%20Gruber,% >>>> >>> >> 20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy >> %20St >>> aff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org > <mailto:aff%2520in%2520support%2520of%2520ALACmailto%3Astaff@atlarge.icann.o > rg> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> At-Large mailing list >>>>> At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large >>>>> >>>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org < >>> http://atlarge.icann.org/> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> EURO-Discuss mailing list >>>> EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss >>>> >>>> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org >>>> <http://www.euralo.org/> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Veronica Cretu * >>> >>> >>> *President, Open Government Institute**Republic of Moldova >>> - http://opengov.si.md/ <http://opengov.si.md/>* >>> >>> *Member of the Steering Committee, * >>> *Open Government Partnership (OGP);* >>> * >>> http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role- >> and-cu >>> rrent-membership >>> < >>> http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role- >> and-cu >>> rrent-membership >>>> * >>> >>> *Member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group* *To the Internet >>> Governance Forum (IGF)* >>> >>> *http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/1549 >>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>* >>> >>> *Member of the Nominating Committee of ICANN* *(Internet Corporation >>> for Assigned Names and Numbering)* >>> >>> *http://www.icann.org/en/groups/nomcom/2014/members >>> <http://www.icann.org< http://www.icann.org/> >* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Email: veronicacretu(a)gmail.com <veronicacretu(a)gmail.com> and/or >>> veronica(a)cretu.md <veronica(a)cretu.md>Skype: veronicacretu Phone: >> 373 >>> 067435000* >>> _______________________________________________ >>> EURO-Discuss mailing list >>> EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss >>> >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org >>> <http://www.euralo.org/> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> APAC-Discuss mailing list >>> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss >>> >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy >> India +91 99524 03099 <tel:%2B91%2099524%2003099> >> _______________________________________________ >> EURO-Discuss mailing list >> EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss >> >> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-Discuss mailing list > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/bfbef9da3f.html --]]

1 0