NCSG Minority report on the EPDP phase 2a final report
Stephanie E Perrin
stephanie.perrin at MAIL.UTORONTO.CA
Sat Sep 11 12:06:32 EEST 2021
There is a short thread in the PC archives, starting here:
https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/2021-September/004093.html
The datestamp is odd, because I sent it at 11.26 EST on Thursday.
However, the PC had been warned it was coming at 12:16 pm Thursday.
I appreciate your concern for procedure, but as an active participant in
policy committee meetings for the last 7 years, I seem to recall plenty
of last minute statement approvals. I briefed the PC on what was going
on at the EPDP at the last meeting. SIlence is read as consent. Milton
raised his objections, and I attempted to provide language that would
cover his concerns. However, if you wish to have the statement
withdrawn, by all means contact the PC chair, Tomslin.
Kind regards,
Stephanie Perrin
On 2021-09-11 10:17 a.m., farzaneh badii wrote:
> You should have submitted it in your own capacity. This is not an NCSG
> statement unless the PC approves it.
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 7:52 PM Stephanie E Perrin
> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:
>
> As I said to the policy committee, I am sorry that this is so
> late. Our last (extra) meeting was on Thursday, and it was really
> only in the last week that it became apparent that if we wanted
> our arguments on the record, we would need to put in a statement.
> So yes I did send the first draft to the policy committee, and no
> one has commented from that group. We then immediately sent it to
> the list.
>
> WE have been making the argument about gig workers for several
> weeks now. These folks would normally be employees, but they are
> forced into contractor roles, largely [in my personal opinion] to
> avoid the employer/employee relationship and all the protections
> that years of labour law have brought to workers. I have
> recognized the need to distance ourselves from them as our
> constituents....they cannot be, if they are contractors working in
> a commercial sense, although there are some that might not be
> excluded from our potential membership....it depends.
> Nevertheless, they may have privacy rights, and this is what the
> discussion is about.
>
> WHen we were dealing with the question of who was entitled to
> privacy proxy services, this issue also surfaced, along with the
> competitive issues. Big corporations often use lawyers to
> register their domains, for a number of reasons, with or without
> the use of proxy services. Small operations, whether commercial
> or not, do not do this for many reasons, cost being one. The
> whole issue of disclosure of data, personal or not, is a serious
> competition issue that never seems to arise in the discussion.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Stephanie Perrin
>
> On 2021-09-10 7:28 p.m., farzaneh badii wrote:
>> Stephanie
>>
>> You gave us only a couple of hours to look at this and i hope
>> the Policy Committee was consulted. Anyhow I think you should (if
>> you really wanna send this statement) delete this paragraph it is
>> absolutely unrelated to the core of the issue:
>>
>> We have also spoken for the rights of gig workers, sole
>> contractors, and independent artists, sales and tradespeople,
>> even though we are explicitly chartered to represent the
>> non-commercial stakeholders. Nobody else is representing these
>> folks, whose numbers are growing apace as employment patterns
>> morph with the global Internet economy. This gap speaks
>> tellingly of the emphasis on big business, and the lack of focus
>> on competitive issues which are exacerbated by DNS policy. We
>> hope that the contracted parties will address the rights of these
>> individuals, and be careful to ensure that they are treated
>> fairly and with due respect for privacy norms when this policy is
>> implemented.
>>
>>
>> On Friday, September 10, 2021, Stephanie E Perrin
>> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:
>>
>> OK folks, Manju and I like the new draft, I put a line or two
>> in to acknowledge Milton's point (with which I agree) and off
>> it goes before the deadline hits.
>>
>> Thanks for your participation, it is always much appreciated!
>>
>> Stephanie Perrin and Man-ju Chen
>>
>> On 2021-09-10 4:21 p.m., Stephanie E Perrin wrote:
>>>
>>> I just edited the Google doc to reflect some of the
>>> comments. We need to wrap this up guys.
>>>
>>> cheers Stephanie Perrin
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2021-09-10 9:51 a.m., Bruna Martins dos Santos wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> First of all, thanks @Stephanie Perrin
>>>> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> and @陳曼茹 Manju
>>>> Chen <mailto:manju at nii.org.tw> for the draft. Although I
>>>> know we are on a tight deadline i took the liberty of
>>>> transforming the word doc into a google docs to facilitate
>>>> the commenting process - if theres any.
>>>>
>>>> Should we set a deadline for comments ?
>>>>
>>>> link is here:
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QJO4R0PNUTj3MDYMbGmjXpAbjTxHzfAl/edit
>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QJO4R0PNUTj3MDYMbGmjXpAbjTxHzfAl/edit>
>>>>
>>>> best,
>>>> Bruna
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:27 AM Stephanie E Perrin
>>>> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>>> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> Man-ju Chen and I have been working on a proposed
>>>> minority statement for
>>>> the final report of the EPDP phase 2a group. We have
>>>> met over the last
>>>> 9 months, the final meeting was last Thursday, and
>>>> since it appears that
>>>> most SGs and ACs are drafting minority statements to
>>>> reinforce their
>>>> views, we have crafted a quick two page brief that
>>>> reiterates many of
>>>> the points we have been trying to make, that are not
>>>> particularly
>>>> visible in the final report. We can of course comment
>>>> publicly, but
>>>> that is not as visible.
>>>>
>>>> We are on deadline for tomorrow, I do apologize for the
>>>> last minute
>>>> notice but work has been quite hectic on this
>>>> committee. Your comments
>>>> are welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Stephanie Perrin and Man-ju Chen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> */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
>>>> <mailto:bruna at dataprivacybr.org> and bruna.mrtns at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Farzaneh
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20210911/daa5b478/attachment.htm>
More information about the Ncsg-discuss
mailing list