August 2011 - Rt4-whois - lists.icann.org

DAKAR MEETING - please confirm
by Alice Jansen Dec. 12, 2011

Dec. 12, 2011

Dear Review Team Members, The next ICANN meeting will be held in Dakar - 23–28 October 2011. Information on this event (venue, hotel, health, visa etc) may be found on the ICANN website at: http://dakar42.icann.org/ With a view to preparing for this meeting, please let us know by Friday, 12 August whether: * you are attending the meeting (Yes/No) * you need travel support (Yes/No) If you do require travel support, please provide us with your desired arrival & departure dates. Once this information submitted, ICANN Constituency Travel will contact you directly to book your trip. * FLIGHTS: Please book your flights through ICANN Constituency Travel. Should you wish to book business or economy premium tickets, please know that an allowance will be granted to you according to your geographic region. * ACCOMMODATION: ICANN Constituency Travel will book your hotel room – please do not book via the website. This is the safe way to have ICANN cover your lodging needs. We look forward to receiving your details. In the meantime, do feel free to contact us should you have questions or concerns. Many thanks in advance, Very best regards Olof & Alice

7 7

Where do I need to be today? TUESDAY
by Alice Jansen Oct. 24, 2011

Oct. 24, 2011

11:00-12:00 Security & Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Moor 12:00-12:30 Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) Bras Basah 14:00-15:00 Business Constituency (BC)/Commercial Stakeholder Group (CSG): Moor 15:00-15:30 Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) Morrison 15:30-16:30 At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) Padang Please refer to outlook invitations for remote participation details.

2 4

Suggested questions for Article 29 speaker
by lynn＠goodsecurityconsulting.com Sept. 14, 2011

Sept. 14, 2011

4 5

Letter from Article 29 Chair, 2007
by Kathy Kleiman Sept. 14, 2011

Sept. 14, 2011

Here is the letter from Mr. Peter Schaar, then chair of Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, to Mr. Vint Cerf. http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/schaar-to-cerf-12mar07.pdf Kathy Kleiman Director of Policy .ORG, The Public Interest Registry Direct: +1 703-889-5756 | Mobile:+1 703-371-6846| www.pir.org <http://www.pir.org> | Find us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/pir.org> | .ORG Blog <http://www.pir.org/orgbuzz> | Flickr <http://flickr.com/orgbuzz> | YouTube <http://youtube.com/orgbuzz> | Twitter <http://twitter.com/ORGBuzz> | Confidentiality Note: Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry. If received in error, please inform sender and then delete.

2 1

Prel Report for your approval
by Alice Jansen Sept. 12, 2011

Sept. 12, 2011

Dear Review Team Members, Please find attached the preliminary report of your teleconference held on 3 August. Kindly note that this has been added to the agenda and that it will be discussed during your conference call today (at 15:00 UTC) with a view to adopting a final version. Thanks, Very best regards Alice

2 4

Chapters - Comments by 31 August
by Alice Jansen Sept. 11, 2011

Sept. 11, 2011

Dear Review Team Members, In anticipation of your call scheduled for 1 September, please be kindly reminded to provide your comments on chapters by 31 August. Your private wiki is the central repository for chapters: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Chapters Thanks, Kind regards Alice

4 6

re-sending Consumer Trust key conceps draft
by lynn＠goodsecurityconsulting.com Sept. 1, 2011

Sept. 1, 2011

3 2

Re: [Rt4-whois] Report input - privacy/proxy 'gaps' [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
by James M. Bladel Sept. 1, 2011

Sept. 1, 2011

6 5

Chapters on private wiki
by Alice Jansen Sept. 1, 2011

Sept. 1, 2011

Dear Review Team Members, Chapters submitted to date are available on the private wiki for your convenience: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Chapters Please be kindly reminded that comments on chapters should be submitted by 31 August (cf: conference call held on 17 August). Thank you, Very best regards Alice

3 2

chapter comments resending
by Kim G. von Arx Aug. 31, 2011

Aug. 31, 2011

Dear All: I am not sure if I can make the call tomorrow, but I will certainly try my best to participate. In anticipation of the call, please find below my general comments on the chapters. 1. Peter I really enjoyed reading your chapter and I think you did an excellent job writing it. There are two concerns that I have: (a) I feel that the chapter lacks some balance between the different factions privacy vs. full disclosure. I am cognizant of the fact that one side certainly is more vocal than the other, however, I do believe that we need to take extra care to make sure that all the views are equally represented in the discussion. Half way through the chapter, I did get the feeling that it was arguing much more strongly in favour of full disclosure and for commercial and law enforcement interests. While I believe that many of the arguments raised are very valid, I do believe it is important to provide a balanced view on all of the positions that were brought to us. (b) While I think the recommendations and conclusions are well argued and thought out, I am somewhat concerned by the scope of the recommendations. I do believe that there is an opportunity for the WHOIS policy to be amended to reflect the needs of all the stakeholders and not just to regulate the proxy services. Indeed, in the grand scheme of things, the former would be easier to implement, maintain, and regulate then the latter - I think. Again, Peter, thank you very much for all the work you did on this. I can only imagine how much time you spent on drafting this and I think you did an excellent job. 2. Kathy Again, thank you very much for the work and I think you did a bang on job in outlining our approach and methodology. I don't really have any comments with respect to your chapter as it was simply a "pulling together" of the facts, dates, and quotes. This is not to say that it did not take much effort on your part, it is merely meant to say that there is really nothing for me to comment and/or argue about considering that all of the things you mentioned are factual. 3. Sharon My thanks to you too for all the work you put into this. I know how busy you are in trying to keep our world a saver place for all of us. I actually spent most time on your parts and re-read them a few times to figure out whether I think any of the comments warrant an amendment to our definition. After a lengthy debate with myself, I reached the conclusion that I do not believe that our definitions need any amendments. I feel that we found a fairly good balance in our approach to the terms and any amendments to the definitions of those terms would slant the balance into one or the other direction. At this stage, I believe that our definitions have found the best possible balance for all stakeholders concerned. 4. Emily I am still working through yours. Kim __________________________________ kim(a)vonarx.ca +1 (613) 286-4445 "Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars..."

2 1