Data Protection and Privacy Update: Seeking Community Feedback on Proposed Compliance Models

[Sam Lanfranco]

I think this discussion has some support for the idea that ICANN's 
contract language should shoot for a minimum of data collection 
consistent with its remit. That would both not encumber registrars with 
contract language and leave them to deal with the demands of their 
national jurisdiction, without having to come back to ICANN in search of 
contract language exceptions.

I don't know if we have any degree of support for the idea that ICANN 
should be present as a stakeholder in the wider Internet governance 
deliberations. I have suggested that ICANN, and its various 
constituencies, should be there both to remind others of ICANN's limited 
remit (to prevent pressure for scope creep) and keep informed of 
emerging governance tendencies where ICANN might need to work to protect 
a DNS where "...  DNS would be globally compatible and the market for 
DNS services would be globally open and competitive."

Sam L.

On 1/15/2018 11:23 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> I do not think we want to maximize the ability of registrars to 
> conform to national law. ICANN was created specifically to be a global 
> governance agency so that DNS would be globally compatible and the 
> market for DNS services would be globally open and competitive. 
> Encouraging variations in practices across jurisdictions moves us away 
> from that goal.
>
> The simple solution to this dilemma is for Whois to conform narrowly 
> to ICANN’s legitimate purpose in collecting the data and thus 
> _/minimize/_ the data that it collects and makes publicly available. 
> Thus, while I agree ICANN not should press for higher national privacy 
> standards, I do agree with Ayden that if it minimizes what it collects 
> and makes available it flies above the problem of jurisdictional 
> variation. If specific jurisdictions want to regulate local registrars 
> to force them to collect and/or disseminate more, that is 
> (unfortunately) something they will have to deal with, but ICANN 
> should make its global whois requirements well above the threshold 
> that would violate the privacy laws of any country.
>
> In this respect ICANN is not the standard setter for all worldwide 
> privacy, but it is, and is supposed to be, the global standard setter 
> for DNS policy.
>
> Dr. Milton Mueller
>
> Professor, School of Public Policy
>
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
> IGP_logo_gold block_email sig <http://www.internetgovernance.org/>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180115/51cd8f3f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3029 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180115/51cd8f3f/attachment.jpg>