[PC-NCSG] NCSG Response to the Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditations Issues (PPSAI) PDP WG Questions

[Avri Doria]

On 04-Mar-14 16:09, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> The charter questions are pretty awful on this PDP. Voluntary
> takedown by the registrant as opposed to reveal is an option we have
> proposed as an accreditation clause.


sure, but that is voluntary by the registrant not the proxy/privacy 
service provider.

correct?

avri

>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> On Mar 4, 2014, at 4:46 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>> I am reading this now and do not understand what sort of the group
>> sis thinking if.  What is this notion of a Proxy/Privacy service
>> taking anything down.  What would they have responsibilities beyond
>> Notify and Reveal.
>>
>> I started to review and I cannot make sense of the questions.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> On 01-Mar-14 13:12, Amr Elsadr wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> The PPSAI PDP WG has sent requests for input from the different
>>> SOs, ACs and GNSO SGs and constituencies on the working group?s
>>> charter questions. Kathy Kleiman has drafted a response to these
>>> questions and has received input from other members of the NCSG,
>>> including Roy Balleste who made some substantive additions. I?m
>>> sending copies of this email to both of them.
>>>
>>> The response they?ve drafted is attached to this email, and I am
>>> asking for review and endorsement of this statement by the
>>> members of the PC to submit it as an NCSG response.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Amr
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
>>> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
>> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>