[Info] German Court Rules on ICANN Request to Preserve WHOIS Data

[Stephanie Perrin]

Well said.

Stephanie Perrin


On 2018-05-31 4:45 AM, Giuseppe De Francesco wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I've been a silent reader until now because GDPR jurisprudence is 
> still building up, and my daily GDPR compliance work doesn't qualify 
> me to argue with a bunch of lawyers, but this is getting off track, 
> and I feel that it is time to chime in. There is enough knowledge 
> about Data Protection (DP) expressed via Article 29 Working Party 
> (A29WP) over the years to clear issues like this without even having 
> to talk about it.
>
> The only problem I see here is about culture. USA vs EU cultural gap. 
> To any EU person, Whois has always been borderline illegal, but we 
> didn't have any law like the GDPR yet. Therefore, we had to keep it to 
> ourselves. Meanwhile, Americans made a lot of money by monetising the 
> Right to Privacy offering Whois protection as a domain add-on. It's 
> just as shameful as monetising public water.
>
> Now we have the GDPR coming into force after two years grace period (I 
> define those "2 years of denial"), and everybody tries to find a 
> loophole in the GDPR to get away with DP violations. Well, let me 
> break this to you guys: there aren't any loopholes, just accept this 
> fact and move on. Google Spain ruling 
> (http://bit.ly/GoogleSpainRuling) should have clarified that in the EU 
> we have a different approach to DP. If Google got kicked before the 
> GDPR, do you think that now is the time to look for loopholes? Please...
>
> Best regards,
> Pino
>
>
>
> On 31 May 2018 at 08:23, valentina hvale pellizzer 
> <valentina at oneworldplatform.net 
> <mailto:valentina at oneworldplatform.net>> wrote:
>
>     Well
>
>     I know will sound foolish but why would be staff accountability
>     off the table? than what is the sense of all these committee,
>     consultations, working groups, big transitions, big policies.
>
>     Find it very depressing and exploitive
>
>     hvale
>
>
>     On 05/31/2018 09:13 AM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
>>     It was a very strange legal strategy that ICANN employed. Now
>>     that it has failed, I wonder what action ICANN org will take next
>>     -- I presume staff accountability for mishandling the issue, and
>>     putting forward such questionable advice, is off the table, but
>>     what's plan D? What will finally give ICANN org the "clarity" it
>>     so desperately craves?
>>
>>     "WhileICANNappreciates the prompt attention the Court paid to
>>     this matter, the Court's ruling today did not provide the clarity
>>     thatICANNwas seeking when it initiated the injunction
>>     proceedings," said John Jeffrey,ICANN's General Counsel and
>>     Secretary.
>>
>>     —Ayden
>>
>>
>>     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>     On 31 May 2018 6:14 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM>
>>     <mailto:rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>
>>>     Hi all,
>>>     you can find here the update on litigation initiated by ICANN
>>>     https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-4-2018-05-30-en
>>>     <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-4-2018-05-30-en>. the
>>>     court rejected injunction requested by ICANN.
>>>
>>>     Best Regards,
>>>
>>>     Rafik
>>
>
>     -- 
>     valentina pellizzer
>     President
>     One World Platform
>
>     https://oneworldplatform.net/
>
>     mobile: +387 (0)61 484 038
>     twitter: @froatosebe
>
>     Fingerprint 30AA 9445 D878 A6C9 FE41 E90D 52A5 36A6 B249 EDA9
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> <https://about.me/pinodefrancesco?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb> 
> 	
> Giuseppe (Pino) De Francesco
> about.me/pinodefrancesco 
> <https://about.me/pinodefrancesco?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb> 
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180531/fbfd3fec/attachment.htm>