Option 1

[dorothy g]

Thank you  for this and for the clarity in explaining the logic of our
position.
I certainly support this position.

On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:39 PM <kathy at dnrc.tech> wrote:

> Tx to Milton, Stephanie, Manju, Tapani, Farzi, Mark Leiser, Kim von Arx
> and everyone else who commented on our dicussion of options for the EPDP.
>
> As it's time to wrap up this issue so our EPDP members can present our
> view to the EPDP Group, I co-wrote the email Stephanie posted earlier today
> (attached below too). Best regards, Kathy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Fellow NCSG members,
>
> We would like to work together to share our rationale for Option 1 –
> maintaining the status quo and not asking further follow-up questions,
> mandatory or otherwise, about legal and natural persons. While the EPDP
> phase 2a discussions have been an educational and interesting exercise, we
> are not under any obligation to change the existing policy, or further
> complicate it.
>
> As we have all discussed, legal/natural person questions are very
> complicated for many of our members who are often noncommercial and
> non-profit organizations whose structure and ways of obtaining domain names
> do not resemble those of the large corporations other stakeholder groups
> represent. Our members may have many layers of privacy protection in
> less-well-known sections of the GDPR, other local law, Constitutions and
> international conventions.
>
> We learned that recent studies show that 50% of gTLD domain name
> registrations are for natural persons – and at least 25% more have
> overlapping entity and personal data (e.g., the organization name has
> personal data in it and is thus protected as personal data).
>
> Stephanie and Kathy shared their concerns for legal/natural person
> questions during our long work on the Proxy and Privacy  Accreditation
> Working Group.   We worked closely with the Registrars Stakeholder Group to
> protect registrant privacy – including Battered Women’s Shelters, family
> planning clinics, and girls educational institutions – all of which may be
> legal entities, but have protectable data due to obvious danger from
> disclosure in certain countries.
>
> *In light of the complicated world around us, we support Option 1- the
> Status Quo. * We ask the NCSG to adopt this as our stance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Based on the existing policy which makes differentiation of legal/natural
> persons optional for each registrar, we believe we already have the -
>   best way to fight DNS Abuse, -        best way to protect individuals and
> noncommercial organizations, and -        best way to follow GDPR and other
> applicable human rights and free speech laws Therefore, we recommend NCSG
> “hold the line” and stick with Option 1.*
>
> *As the Registrars wrote in their EPDP Statement on Thursday April 29: We
> have heard plenty of vocal support in this group to  [differentiate between
> legal and natural persons in a mandatory fashion], but to date the RrSG
> have not heard any compelling reason to create policy that makes this
> dramatic shift to the domain registration landscape.*
>
> *We agree. * Nothing will stop other stakeholder groups from demanding
> further disclosure of data, and lobbying other parties including
> governments. *What we can do in ICANN is come up with the best solution
> for us at this time.*
>
> Many thanks to the members of our NCSG EPDP Team for your hard work. This
> has been a long road.  With new studies, new information and legal
> opinions, we think we have a clear and strategic path forward.  We believe
> our position to be closely aligned with that of the Registrar Stakeholder
> Group, which they articulated on April 29 (see below).
>
> Best, Kathy Kleiman and Stephanie Perrin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> The Registrar Stakeholder Group issued their position statement on
> Thursday (4/29):
>
> The members of the RrSG EPDP team have participated in this process in
> good faith since day one and will continue to do so; however, we need to be
> crystal clear that members of our Stakeholder Group, whom we are here to
> represent, have voiced and recently reconfirmed their strong opposition to
> any policy coming out of this group that makes differentiation between
> natural and legal persons for domain registrations mandatory.
>
> We have heard plenty of vocal support in this group to do just that, but
> to date the RrSG have not heard any compelling reason to create policy that
> makes this dramatic shift to the domain registration landscape. The
> Contracted Party can make the most accurate assessment of their own legal,
> technical, and commercial risks and obligations, and is the only party that
> can determine what level of risk they should assume. The scope of this EPDP
> Phase 2a is to consider if changes are required for the relevant
> Recommendation; it has become clear through this process that no such
> changes are required
>
> To the extent this group can focus its energies on guidance to contracted
> parties which choose on their own to make this differentiation, we continue
> to believe that is a worthwhile exercise. We believe that guidance
> materials including educational information provided by ICANN in multiple
> languages would help contracted parties educate registrants and this would
> be a valuable effort.
>
> That said, based on analysis done by our stakeholder group's members, we
> reject the notion that the majority of registered domain names are
> registered to legal entities. We further remind this team that we have not
> yet seen evidence that increased publication of registration data will
> address any of the problems which have been mentioned so far in this phase,
> and that the registration data is reliably and promptly available to those
> who do have a legitimate reason to access it.
>
> Finally we note that this statement represents the official position of
> the Registrar Stakeholder group, and statements from members of other
> groups participating in the EPDP do not represent our group’s position.
>
> *(Source: Transcript of EPDP-Phase 2A Team Call, 29 April 2021, Statement
> of Volker Greimann on behalf of the Registrars Stakeholder Group read into
> the record)*
>


-- 

stay well, kind regards
Dorothy Gordon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20210505/917fdfb0/attachment.htm>