<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Hi Stephanie,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">We both asked Maryam to follow up on NCSG session with the UN special rapp. I think would be helpful that Tapani also follows up since it's an NCSG request and we still don't see it on the schedule. Did I interpret it wrong that you said Chuck was planning to turn that into a GNSO meeting. Is the wednesday session only NCSG meeting wtih the UN rapp?</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Farzaneh </font></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:23 PM, Stephanie Perrin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca" target="_blank">stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">What happened is this:</font></font></p>
<ul>
<li><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">GAC was asked to
sponsor, never got it done</font></font></li>
<li><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">GNSO was asked to
sponsor, proposed instead to replace a lapsed HIT with this
panel</font></font></li>
<li><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Invitations went
out for the opening day of the conference (they had to,
these are busy guys) <br>
</font></font></li>
<li><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">IPC weighed in
demanding balanced HIT style panels (Victoria sheckler their
person on this)<br>
</font></font></li>
<li><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Side meetings have
apparently been arranged</font></font></li>
<li><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">only guy available
for our meeting on Wednesday is UN Special Rapporteur for
privacy (grateful for this, this is a big deal and I am
trying to get his latest book read prior to the event </font></font></li>
</ul>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Last version I saw of
the schedule we did not have a session. You were checking on
that. Chuck Gomes was asking for time for the PDP on RDS but
Monday is only day, he is trying for 8 am breakfast meeting.</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">cheers Steph<br>
</font></font></p><div><div class="h5">
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande"></font></font><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116moz-cite-prefix">On 2017-02-14 23:09, farzaneh badii
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Hi Stephanie,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Can you clarify
something for me? Is this the </span><font face="verdana,
sans-serif">Cross- </font><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Community </font><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Discussion </span><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">wi<wbr>th Data </span><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Protection </span><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Commissioners</span><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">?<wbr> </span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">If so, didn't we also
submit a session request ( NCSG request)? Did that turn into
the above session? Where did this session come from and
where is NCSG session?</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Farzaneh </font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:43 PM,
Stephanie Perrin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca" target="_blank">stephanie.perrin@mail.<wbr>utoronto.ca</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>I am biting my tongue on this. As some of you heard,
I raised this with Goran. I am tempted to just slide it
along to him. With of course a mention of how the GAC
and ICANN staff sat on this from Hyderabad until mid
January.</p>
<p>Suggestions welcome. Pissed off, am I. <br>
</p>
<p>Steph<br>
</p>
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------
<table class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">Subject: </th>
<td>Re: ICANN58 Data Protection Session Planning</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">Date: </th>
<td>Tue, 14 Feb 2017 21:52:54 -0500</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">From: </th>
<td>Greg Shatan <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank"><gregshatanipc@gmail.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">To: </th>
<td>KIMPIAN Peter <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Peter.KIMPIAN@coe.int" target="_blank"><Peter.KIMPIAN@coe.int></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">CC: </th>
<td>Victoria Sheckler <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:vsheckler@riaa.com" target="_blank"><vsheckler@riaa.com></a>,
James M. Bladel <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com" target="_blank"><jbladel@godaddy.com></a>,
<a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kathy@kathykleiman.com" target="_blank">kathy@kathykleiman.com</a> <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kathy@kathykleiman.com" target="_blank"><kathy@kathykleiman.com></a>,
<a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz" target="_blank">donna.austin@neustar.biz</a> <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz" target="_blank"><donna.austin@neustar.biz></a>,
<a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:heather.forrest@acu.edu.au" target="_blank">heather.forrest@acu.edu.au</a>
<a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:heather.forrest@acu.edu.au" target="_blank"><heather.forrest@acu.edu.au></a>,
Stephanie Perrin <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca" target="_blank"><stephanie.perrin@mail.utoront<wbr>o.ca></a>,
KWASNY Sophie <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Sophie.KWASNY@coe.int" target="_blank"><Sophie.KWASNY@coe.int></a>,
Wilson, Christopher <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:cwilson@21cf.com" target="_blank"><cwilson@21cf.com></a>,
Tony Holmes <a class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com" target="_blank"><tonyarholmes@btinternet.com></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">All,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><i>First, apologies
for the length of this message and a tone that
is more strident than I intend it to be.
Another pass through this email could smooth
the rough edges, but it is 2:45 am in
Reykjavik and I have a 7:15 breakfast meeting,
so my capacity is exhausted (and so am I).
Please read this with a friendly, collegial
tone in mind and indulge me where I have
failed to have the tone of the text match my
desire to be a good working partner (and to
"disagree without being disagreeable") even
where our perspectives may differ. (As
partial explanation, my sport of choice in my
youth was rugby ("a ruffian's game played by
gentlemen"), while fencing probably would have
been more apropos....)</i></font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I am
quite concerned with where we are in this
discussion. There are either some substantial
misunderstandings about what this session, as a
"High Interest Topic", is supposed to be -- or
there is an apparent intent to exclude
perspectives that will keep this from being a
celebration of data protection principles. I
hope it's the former, but even that is
unfortunate.</span><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Perhaps the
root of the problem is combining the original idea
for a CoE-organized presentation with the High
Interest Topic (HIT) concept -- or perhaps that just
highlighted the inherent problem with the session.
HIT doesn't just refer to a level of interest --
it's supposed to be a community-generated proposal
that is then planned and presented with
multistakeholder participation (and <u>not</u> merely
by the proposing organization). One of the problems
we had with the last round of HITs was a proposal
for a HIT session to be planned and presented by a
single part of the community, largely consisting of
a presentation by one of its members and only minor
roles for any sector not sympathetic to the views of
this member and community group. This was
inconsistent with the idea that the proposing
organization does not control the content of a HIT
session. Fortunately, the original planners agreed
to to expand to a more diverse planning team, with
the result being a more diverse panel and a very
lively and well-received session. When community
leaders got on the phone to consider this round of
HITs, we wanted to avoid a replay of this situation
(although it ended well enough).</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">When this
data protection session was brought to the community
leaders group as a late suggestion for one of the
HIT slots, I was concerned we might be heading for a
replay, so the IPC specified that one of our members
(Vicky) should be added to the planning group
(knowing that at least one other constituency shared
very similar concerns). Unlike the last time, where
we were able to get a hand on the tiller and help
turn the ship, I've found our attempts to be largely
rebuffed. This has been increasingly frustrating.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I'd like to
respond to some of the specific statements on this
thread since I last had an opportunity to respond:</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;display:inline">Vicky
wrote: </div>
<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">I
don’t see here (but I am also sleep deprived)
which panelist will represent public safety /
transparency / enforcement concerns.</span></div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><br>
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;display:inline"></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;display:inline">Peter
responded: </div>
<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Uuhhh,
if you are in US it is quite early for you…in my
sense usually the governments are responsible
and accountable for the issues you mentioned,
therefore it seemed to me logical that those
issues will be taken care by a representative of
the GAC. Besides that, the PSWG is a sub-group
of the GAC which is deliberately discussing
those issues you mentioned…</span></div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><span style="font-family:calibri,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;display:inline"><span style="font-size:11pt"></span>Greg: This
misses the point of Vicky's question and
perhaps misses a fundamental point about
ICANN -- that it is a multistakeholder
organization and <i>not</i> a multilateral
organization. Governments are not the only
ones concerned with investigation and
enforcement -- there are also significant
parts of the private sector deeply engaged
in investigation and enforcement (and not to
put too fine a point on it, but IPC (my
group and Vicky's group) represents one of
those parts of the private sector). As
such, at least one voice from these parts of
the private sector should be present on the
panel. Even within governments, there are
parts that deal with public safety and
enforcement. The idea that a representative
of the GAC will provide this perspective
seems mistaken. As fine a chair as the GAC
chair is, I don't believe this is his
perspective, and the suggestion this would
be within his brief seemed based more on
protocol than practicality. As revealed in
this thread, Ms. Bauer-Bulst is the co-chair
of the PSWG, so would be more on point for
this perspective (though apparently she is
not sufficiently august to appear on the
panel, even if she is a Deputy Head of Unit,
and not merely a Team Leader as was stated
earlier in this exchange).</div>
</font></span></div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Peter
replied to James Bladel in red below:</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"> <br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672compose">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks, Peter.
Looks like I did miss this at some
point, so please accept my apologies
for the confusion.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Generally, I"m ok
with this, but a few thoughts:</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* I'm not sure
what "sponsored" by the GNSO means
in this context. Maybe we could say
something like "convened" or
"supported" jointly by the GNSO
& GAC?<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span><span style="font-family:wingdings;color:red">à</span><span style="color:red">
this expression was used by ICANN
staff but I can only agree that
those you suggested are much
better.<br>
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg:
From my point of view, this support is
predicated on the panel representing multiple
perspectives.</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div>
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div id="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672compose">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div>
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div id="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672compose">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* I think we
need to keep the number panelists
to an absolute minimum.<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span><span style="font-family:wingdings;color:red">à</span><span style="color:red">
I agree. 3+3 should be the
maximum (!).</span> If we
strive to represent all seven GNSO
SG/Cs, plus GAC, plus COE/DPAs,
then this session runs the risk of
becoming "Death by PowerPoint" and
dosn't leave much time for
Q&A. To that end, I will let
Graeme know that we are looking
for a RrSG panelist, but would
encourage them to reach out to Jim
Galvin and see if he is
comfortable representing industry
generally. Or if we need another
CPH person that can wear both
"hats."<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span>
<span style="font-family:wingdings;color:red">à</span><span style="color:red"> not
necessarily as Jim could
represent it quite well, I am
sure. (Being said that we would
have preferred more focus on the
industry itself and to the
different players as they are
the first level data
controllers. All NCPH and GAC
related groups are secondary
only) But if the internal
dynamic of GNSO is as such, be
it, but in this case we suggest
Becky Burr to be on the panel
(and not being moderator).</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg:
ICANN and the GNSO are not merely about "the
industry." If you wanted an industry facing
program or a dialogue only with "the industry",
the appropriate place for that would be the GDD
(Global Domains Division) Summit. As the
President of an "NCPH related group" I can
assure you that our concerns about data
protection and privacy are not "secondary" -- at
least not to us and our stakeholder community.
This further shows the problem of "perspectives"
as this panel is being planned.</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div>
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div id="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672compose">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* Similarly, I
think the NCPH should strive for
~2 panelists. Again, I apologize
if the discussions were already
headed in this direction, as I
have lost track of the names
proposed in this thread.<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span><span style="font-family:wingdings;color:red">à</span><span style="color:red">
I really think that if CPH has
one panellist NCPH should also
has to have 1 only because of
the arguments expressed above.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg:
Peter, you may not know it (or perhaps you may)
but the NCPH is an umbrella over two parts of
the GNSO -- the Commercial Stakeholder Group and
the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group. There is
no valid way that a single panelist could
provide the sharply different perspectives of
these two stakeholder groups. Even having a
single panelist representative the different
perspectives of IP stakeholders, ISPs and
Connectivity Providers, and the business user
community is a stretch (which hopefully would be
mitigated by Q&A). I would say that if only
panelist came from the NCPH, they should come
from the CSG, as we would offer a more
distinguishable perspective, but frankly that
would be unfair to the Non-Commercial side of
the house (which itself includes a range of
viewpoints), and I don't want to be unfair to
the NCSG and its constituencies either.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div>
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div id="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672compose">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:wingdings;color:red">à</span><span style="color:red"> Therefore our
suggestion for the panel: Becky
Burr, Thomas Schneider, Jim
Galvin </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg:
This neatly includes the contracted parties
(Registries and Registrars) and excluded the
commercial private sector represented in the
NCPH. This is not acceptable. (Which is why
James, as Chair of the GNSO, wisely suggested 2
panelists from the NCPH.)</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">This
description was provided by Peter:</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div id="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672compose">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:35.4pt"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">A community-wide event will be
organised on 13 March 2017 under
the form of a High Interest Topic
“sponsored” by the Generic Names
Supporting Organization (GNSO)
Council (and possibly by the
Governmental Advisory Committee
(GAC) as well) which will enable
the participation of interested
ICANN communities. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg: We
are an interested ICANN community and we have
been seeking to participate and/or to have
participation from the
enforcement/cybercrime/infring<wbr>ement side of
the roster. So far with no success.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:35.4pt"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">The session could be jointly opened
by the CEO of ICANN Board and the
Director of Information Society
and Action against Crime of the
Council of Europe. During the
session the United Nations’
Special Rapporteur on the right to
privacy, the co-Chair of the
Article 29 Working Group and the
European Data Protection
Supervisor together with high
level representatives of
registries’ group, the registrars’
group and the GAC will address in
10 minutes each the above
mentioned topics. During the
session the involvement of the
audience will be guaranteed by an
open mike slot.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I
think during the last days, weeks
we have reached an agreement on Ms
Becky Burr moderating the panel
and having James Galvin as
representative for registries’
group (both seemed to agree on
that). If we follow this logic we
would need one representative from
the GAC and one from registrars’
group. (We previously </span></p>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;display:inline">P</div>
suggested that the chair of these
communities could be invited to speak
under these two slots).</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">Greg: Not to sound like a
broken record, but this emphasis on including
the contracted parties to the exclusion of the
non-contracted parties really runs counter to
multistakeholder sensibilities.</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">If the emphasis is on "high
level representatives" and "chairs" I would be
willing to join the panel as the chair of my
community, though we may have better
candidates on substance (including Vicky, who
is our vice chair).<br>
</font></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">In
response to my email asking what her goals for
the panel were (and which stated much of what
I've restated above), Stephanie Perrin wrote: <span>Peter
and the COE are organizing this. I will let
them explain the goals. In my personal
view....data protection commissioners are not
present at ICANN. The dialogue has been
anything but robust, although they have been
attempting to engage for many many years.</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="arial,
helvetica, sans-serif">Vicky responded:</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">It is clear we need
additional perspectives to make this a
robust panel. I think james is a good
addition and we also need someone with
Cathrin's perspective,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Greg: We still need that
perspective.</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Peter
responded with COE's goals:</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:16px;text-align:justify;text-indent:47.2px">The
panellists will be invited to exchange
views on the privacy and data protection
implications of processing of WHOIS data,
third party access to personal data and
the issue of accountability for the
processing of personal data. The expected
outcome of the event is a better mutual
understanding of the underlying questions
related to the protection of privacy and
personal data and the strengthening of an
open and inclusive dialogue on these
issues, to be carried on anytime deemed
necessary.</span></div>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg:
We are among those "third parties" and we are
seeking to be included in an open and
inclusive dialogue, and to include the
perspective of government as among those
"third parties" as well. I'm not sure why
this has become quite so difficult.</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Prior to
that Peter wrote: </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">I
really don’t want to hurt anybody personally,
I find this exchange of mails rather odd
[discussion of the importance of EDPS,
correction of Ms. Bauer-Bulst's
characterization of the EDPS as a "body that
advises," and the relative ranks of various
potential panelists removed for space]</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif" color="#000000">Greg: I'm not sure
why you find this exchange of emails "rather
odd", but perhaps it traces back to the
mismatch between a community-planned HIT and a
panel planned by the CoE. These emails are
our attempts at community planning -- again an
essentially multistakeholder effort.</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">In
response to Stephanie's question to me "Who
would you propose?" (responding to my view that
we needed a panel that represented multiple
perspectives), Peter wrote:</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">I think
we all are on the same page...therefore I
suggest to include Becky Burr to this panel.
She was recommended by other constituencies as
well so if you agree we can move along.</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif">Greg: I respect Becky immensely
and already said she was a great choice on
many counts. Yet, the response above misses
my point -- that we need perspectives beyond
data protection officials and "the industry."</font></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-GB">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672WordSection1">
<div class="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-h5">
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div id="m_-1196239896132014116m_-3173739836713035587gmail-m_-6066402398364144317gmail-m_-4559061870864558269gmail-m_4485284271700414672m_-2202888440288636124AppleMailSignature">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Any more
would be piling on, but I wanted to note just a
couple more things. One was Peter's suggestion
that <i style="text-align:justify;text-indent:35.4pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:black">The current state of
preparation would imply the following
meetings</span></i><span style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif;color:black">-</span><span style="text-align:justify;font-size:7pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><i style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:black">a session with the GAC
plenary,</span></i><span style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif;color:black">-</span><span style="text-align:justify;font-size:7pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><i style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:black">a working lunch with the
Board,</span></i><span style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif;color:black">-</span><span style="text-align:justify;font-size:7pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><i style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:black">community wide afternoon
session possibly in the format of an “High
Interest Topic”.</span></i><span style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif;color:black">-</span><span style="text-align:justify;font-size:7pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><i style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:black">alternatively or
subsequently a joint meeting with GNSO
Council and ccNSO Council </span></i><span style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif;color:black">-</span><span style="text-align:justify;font-size:7pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><i style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:black">bilateral meetings with
NSCG, NCUC and ALAC</span></i></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><i style="text-align:justify;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:black"><br>
</span></i></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg: I
would suggest that a bilateral meeting with the
CSG (and not merely with the more <i>simpatico</i>
community groups) should be considered, to say
the least. We would be honored to have such a
meeting (and we don't bite).</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Peter
wrote, in response to Vicky:</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-US">Separately, please note I
anticipate having some additional suggestions
for consideration for this panel by the end of
next week.</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-US"> </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:wingdings;color:red" lang="EN-US">à</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:red" lang="EN-US">Please do so, but you have to
understand that it is rather strange that 1
month away of the event we don’t know who the
speakers would be. We have also made
suggestions which we believe enjoy the support
of many in GNSO (and beyond) fellows and
follows the idea of multi-stakeholderism and
cover the main issues Victoria suggested us to
take into account including third party access
to data. I would recommend to consider those
and come back to us as quickly as you can…</span><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:calibri,sans-serif;color:red" lang="EN-US"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif" color="#000000">Greg: Given that
this session was only suggested as a High
Interest Topic on January 23, it's not so
strange that we have not finalized the
speakers list. We began discussing the other
HIT sessions quite a bit earlier. That said,
the sooner we can bring the necessary people
with the necessary perspectives and the
necessary protocol-sensitive rank (apologies
for our insensitivity to protocol concerns; I
guess Americans don't do well with rank, and
one of the refreshing aspects of the ICANN
milieu is that rank is generally absent from
our considerations).</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif">I will once again emphasize that
GNSO is itself a multistakeholder organization
so having "the support of many in GNSO" does
not mean that your suggestions have the
support of our part of the GNSO (hence, our
attempts since late last month). Leaving out
the commercial sector does not quite follow
the idea of multistakeholderism....</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif">I would love nothing more for us
to resolve this to our collective and
individual satisfaction and move on. I look
forward to doing so.</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default">Best Regards,</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default">Greg Shatan</div>
<div class="gmail_default">President</div>
<div class="gmail_default">Intellectual Property
Constituency</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
NCSG-PC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is" target="_blank">NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/ncsg-pc</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>