ICANN Response to Art 29 WP

[farzaneh badii]

And here is ICANN's response to Article 29 WP.




Farzaneh


​----​




Please see our most recent announcement
<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-04-12-en> regarding the letter
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/jelinek-to-marby-11apr18-en.pdf>
from
the Article 29 Working Party. The letter was published on our main
Correspondence page <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence>,
and linked to our Data Protection/Privacy page
<https://www.icann.org/dataprotectionprivacy>.



----------------------------------



*ICANN Receives Data Protection/Privacy Guidance from Article 29 Working
Party*

LOS ANGELES – 12 April 2018 – The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers ("ICANN") today announced that it has received a letter from
the Article 29 Working Party (WP29)
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/jelinek-to-marby-11apr18-en.pdf>
[PDF, 400 KB] that provides guidance on the European Union's General Data
Protection Regulation (GDPR) and its impact on the collection, retention
and publication of domain name registration data and the WHOIS system.
ICANN organization’s response to the letter from the Article 29 Working
Party will be published shortly here
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence>.



“We appreciate the guidance provided by the Article 29 Working Party on
this important issue and have accepted an invitation to meet with the WP29
Technology Subgroup in Brussels on 23 April for further discussions,” said
Göran Marby, ICANN president and CEO. “However, we are disappointed that
the letter does not mention our request for a moratorium on enforcement of
the law until we implement a model. Without a moratorium on enforcement,
WHOIS will become fragmented and we must take steps to mitigate this issue.
As such, we are studying all available remedies, including legal action in
Europe to clarify our ability to continue to properly coordinate this
important global information resource. We will provide more information in
the coming days.”



A moratorium on enforcement action by DPAs would potentially allow for the
introduction of an agreed-upon accreditation model and for the registries
and registrars to implement the accreditation model in conjunction with the
measures in the agreed final interim compliance model. It will also allow
for reconciliation between the advice ICANN has received from its
Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) and the Article 29 Working Party.
Unless there is a moratorium, we may no longer be able to give instructions
to the contracted parties through our agreements to maintain WHOIS. Without
resolution of these issues, the WHOIS system will become fragmented until
the interim compliance model and the accreditation model are implemented.



A fragmented WHOIS would no longer employ a common framework for generic
top-level domain (gTLD) registration directory services. Registries and
registrars would likely implement varying levels of access to data
depending on their interpretations of the law.

“In parallel, we will carefully consider this advice, along with all of the
input we have received from the multistakeholder community, before making
changes to the current iteration of the proposed interim model
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdpr-compliance-interim-model-08mar18-en.pdf>,”
Marby continued. “As a part of this, we will explore all options as we
continue dialogues with DPAs and the interested parties that comprise the
multistakeholder community.”



It’s important to balance the right to privacy with the need for
information. While ICANN recognizes the importance of the GDPR and its goal
of protecting personal data, parts of the ICANN community have noted the
negative impact of a fragmented WHOIS. For example, it will hinder the
ability of law enforcement to get important information and the anti-spam
community to help ensure the Internet protects end-users. It will also:

   - Protect the identity of criminals who may register hundreds of domain
   names specifically for use in cyberattacks;
   - Hamper the ability of consumer protection agencies who track the
   traffic patterns of illicit businesses;
   - Stymie trademark holders from protecting intellectual property; and
   - Make it significantly harder to identify fake news and impact the
   ability to take action against bad actors.



These are just a few examples from a long list of potentially adverse
scenarios.

Marby also requested that the DPAs include ICANN in any proceedings
relating to WHOIS, and asks that it be included in all discussions and
actions of the privacy regulators with the other WHOIS data controllers. He
also said that ICANN org is continuing its efforts to prepare for
implementation of a new model. Additional information on ICANN’s data
protection/privacy activities, including legal analyses, proposed
compliance models, and community feedback is published here
<https://www.icann.org/dataprotectionprivacy>.



We encourage the community to provide feedback and continue our dialogues
on future activities. You may share your views with us via email at
gdpr at icann.org.







_______________________________________________
So-ac-sg-cleaders mailing list
So-ac-sg-cleaders at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/so-ac-sg-cleaders
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180412/24d8b106/attachment.htm>