ICANN Comments to EDPB and content regulation

Sun Feb 28 22:00:35 EET 2021

Awesome! Thank you Stephanie and Farell for volunteering for this one.

Tomslin

On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 06:27, Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca> wrote:

> Thanks Farrell, that is great!!
> Stephanie
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 28, 2021, at 14:00, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org> wrote:
>
> 
> *EXTERNAL EMAIL:*
> Hello all,
>
> I would like to join Stephanie on this, to provide assistance or any
> useful help.
>
> @__f_f__
>
> Best regards
> ____________________________________
>
> Lt-Colonel Farell FOLLY, Ir
> GNSO Councillor
> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 28 Feb 2021, at 17:49, Stephanie E Perrin <
> stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca> wrote:
>
> I will volunteer to draft this thing.  Fair warning though, I think we
> have to comment on the fact that every time we make a concession on
> something and compromise, at the next stage of the game, the other side
> re-litigates old issues.  There are also a  number of hardy perennials in
> the EPDP combat zone that just keep coming back despite the agreed
> policy.....such as the fact that we are aiming for a harmonized policy, not
> just compliance with GDPR in regions where it's application is
> incontestable.  A question of bargaining in good faith, one might say,
> continues to haunt this work.
>
> All help gratefully received.
>
> Stephanie Perrin
> On 2021-02-28 3:45 a.m., Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote:
>
> Thank you Bruna. Nice work!
>
> In a similar vein and more on SSAD, I would like to remind members that
> there is an open Public Comment proceeding seeking input on the final
> recommendations that relate to SSAD which closes in 30 days. We still do
> not have any volunteers to draft the comment.
>
> The announcement is here >>
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/epdp-2-policy-recs-board-2021-02-08-en
> And the draft comment is here >>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QAUa2nT2a9YGGhK0r603EJCXfa58elXd9kPh3DH0DrU/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Regards,
> Tomslin
>
>
>
> On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 at 07:28, Bruna Martins dos Santos <
> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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/20210228/4662423e/attachment.htm>