ICANN Comments to EDPB and content regulation

Thu Feb 25 15:28:16 EET 2021

Dear all,

Hope this email finds you all well and safe!

I'm writing to let you know that I have just received a response from the
ICANN CEO to our communication re. SSAD.

Best regards,
Bruna

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:02 PM Kristi Hoffmaster <
kristi.hoffmaster at gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> Thank you!
>
> Please include this - crucial:
>
>
> 1. Could you please clarify in what ways the SSAD could be instrumental
> for stopping and preventing the dissemination of illegal content and in
> order to avoid related societal harms ?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 6:11 PM Poncelet Jokkolabs Banjul <
> pileleji at jokkolabs.co> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 12, 2021, Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> First of all, thank you very much for the comments on this thread. As
>>> suggested, I took the liberty of taking Sam's comments and shaping into a
>>> letter to the ICANN Board and CEO on this topic.
>>>
>>> The darft can be found here -
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mmax62EkxSRgr8AMi8jqnNXlP36cjRdfqFy6gYrmnPY/edit
>>> - and I would like to invite you all to add your comments and suggestions
>>> to it.
>>>
>>> Considering this letter is about a communication issued by ICANN Org to
>>> the EPDB in December, I would say it's good for us to send it maybe next
>>> week. But, as usual, I would like to hear your thoughts on the matter as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Bruna
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 7:56 PM Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Milton, the comments are in the public domain and the NCSG is free to
>>>> use them as they see fit. Thanks for the support.
>>>>
>>>> Sam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 8, 2021 3:51 PM
>>>> *To:* Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca>; NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>> *Subject:* RE: ICANN Comments to EDPB and content regulation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is a great comment, Sam, why don’t NCSG officers just copy and
>>>> paste them into an emailed letter to the CEO and Board?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> *On Behalf Of *Sam
>>>> Lanfranco
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 8, 2021 2:22 PM
>>>> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>> *Subject:* Re: ICANN Comments to EDPB and content regulation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I understand the “*ICANN org Comments on the Recommendations
>>>> 01/2020 on Measures That Supplement Transfer Tools  to Ensure Compliance
>>>> With  the  EU Level  of Protection of Personal Data*”, they deal
>>>> primarily with the transfer of data between regulatory jurisdictions and
>>>> the processes necessary to meet a strict interpretation of the GDPR’s
>>>> international data transfer requirements.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This has absolutely nothing to do with “…*stopping and preventing the
>>>> dissemination of illegal content and in order to avoid related societal
>>>> harms*.” (*Comments: p. 2*) except in so far as legitimate requests by
>>>> legal authorities may be related to investigations around such matters.
>>>> Given that such matters reside outside ICANN’s remit, ICANN org should be
>>>> asked to expunge the phrase from its position on transfer tool compliance
>>>> with the EU’s personal data protections.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Secondly, I have a couple of questions in areas that are not clear to
>>>> me. The *Comments* say that the proposed SSAD model would introduce *“…a
>>>> centralized process for managing access requests and placing ICANN org in
>>>> the middle of this process*.” They go on to say “*ICANN org or its
>>>> designee(s) would manage a system for the intake of requests for data and
>>>> would route these requests to the registrar or registry operator for a
>>>> response*.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is not clear if, in one way or another, ICANN would be the central
>>>> clearing house for dealing with such requests, and it is not clear to whom “
>>>> *designee(s*)” refers to.  My question is whether an ICANN-centric
>>>> clearing house is the proper solution here, or whether a less centralized
>>>> multilateral agreed upon set of principles (and processes) would better
>>>> serve the intended objectives? Also, any transfer involves at least two
>>>> national jurisdictions, so a rogue recipient state’s behavior could be
>>>> blocked by a sending state in compliance with agreed principles and
>>>> processes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lastly, is there an issue of who decides whether an inter-state request
>>>> is legitimate?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sam Lanfranco
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> *On Behalf Of *Stephanie
>>>> Perrin
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 8, 2021 10:33 AM
>>>> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>> *Subject:* Re: ICANN Comments to EDPB and content regulation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for raising this Farzi, i will confess that i was goofing off at
>>>> Christmas and totally missed this letter.  I will raise it at the next EPDP
>>>> meeting, and I think this ought to be raised at Council as well.  I should
>>>> have raised it at the meeting yesterday of the small team looking at the
>>>> other SSAD response (letter from the Board) even if it is a mite off topic
>>>> there....this is a real  howler.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again!
>>>>
>>>> Stephanie Perrin
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 7, 2021, at 21:03, Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix <
>>>> rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Farzaneh and Bruna. Could easily have flown under the radar
>>>> and forgotten after Christmas. This is certainly an important matter. Looks
>>>> typical in its language: putting various kinds of processing as matters of
>>>> "necessity" without looking into purpose and context of such processing.
>>>> ICANN is no "surveillance capitalist," but precisely if it sticks to its
>>>> narrow mandate and to appropriately, narrowly designed processing, it will
>>>> also steer clear of any form of trouble with (most) DPAs and their related
>>>> statutes. Now, if it starts giving in to pressures by certain interests to
>>>> stop the "social harm" of fake gucci bags (hmm...), well, we get that kind
>>>> of letter, I suppose.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd be happy to help on the matter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have a nice day!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 10:27 AM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thank you so much for raising this here Farz.  I will definitely
>>>> mention this topic when I have my next interaction with Goran.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> About the Content Moderation part, I agree with you that this topic
>>>> might be absolutely out of the scope of the SSAD and ICANN as well. And
>>>> this has been a point this community has raised before - more than just
>>>> once and about Whois and CoMo. I also happen to agree that the definitions
>>>> of Illegal content and content related to societal harm are rather open and
>>>> problematic for the SSAD - or for many other discussions as well.
>>>>
>>>> Should we work on a letter - to the Board, the EPDB or both - reviving
>>>> our arguments about Whois and Content moderation and send it once again ?
>>>> Are there any volunteers who would like help me with this ?
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Bruna
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 12:00 PM farzaneh badii <
>>>> farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In my spare time, I got to read ICANN's letter dated 21 December 2020
>>>> to EDPB about compliance with GDPR.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icann-org-comments-edpb-recs-21dec20-en.pdf
>>>> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fen%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Ffiles%2Ficann-org-comments-edpb-recs-21dec20-en.pdf&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40GATECH.EDU%7C120fb15e918b4593cbcd08d8b40ab7f4%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637457305705415204%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=OYD%2F%2FPaI8UbF69q4aee3gMjUtVvIxcLENBr%2Fzsp%2F%2BRQ%3D&reserved=0>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There was one alarming issue raised in this letter, and since the
>>>> Internet community has been mentioned, I think we should at least ask Bruna
>>>> to raise it with the CEO next time she talks to him. I know we
>>>> haven't drafted other  important comments but I haven't followed EPDP so
>>>> will leave that to the members.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> P.2: "The SSAD is therefore instrumental for stopping and preventing
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>> *dissemination of illegal content and in order to avoid related
>>>> societal harm*s". This is alarming because the SSAD is serving ICANN's
>>>> mission which has nothing to do with the regulation of illegal content and
>>>> that is outside of its mission. I don't know what they mean by societal
>>>> harm. We have many times told ICANN not to be careless when it comes to the
>>>> limited function of WHOIS and relate it to content regulation. They said
>>>> they wouldn't. But here they are definitely going into those territories.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are other matters in the letter as well but I haven't had the
>>>> time to read closely, for example they are talking about "thick WHOIS" not
>>>> happening because of the strict international transfer. I am not sure where
>>>> epdp is at with discussing thick whois. Can we even have it in place?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>>>
>>>> @boomartins
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>>
>>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>> @boomartins
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Poncelet O. Ileleji*
>> *Jokkolabs Banjul -  Lead*
>> *Sait Matty Road, Bakau, Adjacent to Swedish Consulate*
>> *KMC, The Gambia*
>> *P O Box 4496 Bakau,KMC, The Gambia*
>> *Skype: pons_utd*
>> *Tel Direct Office: +220 4495115*
>>
>> *Tel Mobile/Whatsapp: +220 9912508*
>> *www.jokkolabs.net* <http://www.jokkolabs.co>
>>
>> *LinkedIn: Jokkolabs Banjul*
>> *Facebook: Jokkolabs Banjul*
>> *Twitter: @jklBanjul*
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>
>
> Kristi Hoffmaster
> Webmaster - SPX Corporation Owner - Shop Hoffmaster
>
> Day mobile (980) 215-3296 Mobile (864) 237-1766
>

-- 

*Bruna Martins dos Santos *

Advocacy Coordinator | Data Privacy Brazil Research
<https://www.dataprivacybr.org/en/>

Member | Coalizão Direitos na Rede <https://direitosnarede.org.br/>
Chair | Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN
<https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/ncsg>
Co-Coordinator | Internet Governance Caucus  <https://igcaucus.org/>

Twitter: @boomartins <https://twitter.com/boomartins> // Skype:
bruna.martinsantos
bruna at dataprivacybr.org and bruna.mrtns at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20210225/86ccc795/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Response to NCSG's Letter from Bruna Martins dos Santos.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 198669 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20210225/86ccc795/attachment.pdf>