[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] RDS Scope Guidance

[Kathy Kleiman]

Tx you, Stephanie for cc'ing me.  I don't think this scope goes far 
enough -- and I don't see any questions asking about the protections for 
Registrants. We worked very hard in Whois Review Team One to ensure that 
the inquiry was balanced and that everyone knew that Whois 
investigations, disclosures and compilations could hurt those 
Noncommercial Registrants and others who use the DNS for free speech, 
free expression, fair use and fair dealing and other forms of treasured 
communication -- including speech critical to governments, corporations, 
even ICANN!

Accordingly, I look at the list below and wonder (in red) about whether 
it can be expanded to at least be balanced and not completely one-sided 
in its review (e.g., how much can we give those who complain (IP and 
LE)? */Q/**/uick note that I have no idea how to take these suggestions 
to those who can process them -- do you? Can you?/*

Best, Kathy

      o

        Whether RDS efforts meet the “legitimate needs of law
        enforcement, promoting consumer trust and safeguarding
        registrant data.”

      o Whether RDS effort protect the legitimate rights of registrants
        - individuals, noncommercial organizations, small businesses and
        others, in their right to communicate political, personal,
        research, hobby and educational ideas with the privacy granted
        under national laws and consistent with the best free expression
        traditions of the world.
      o

        How RDS current & future recommendations might be improved and
        better coordinatedfor the benefit of all stakeholders.

      o

        Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues and Implementation

          + How was the balance achieved in this long and painstaking
            Working Group? (with over 10,000 comments)
          + Has implementation under the direction of ICANN Staff and a
            much smaller team of volunteers fulfilled (or not) the goals
            of the PPSAI Working Group
      o

        Compliance enforcement actions, structure, and processes

          + Where are the Due Process Protections for registrants?
          + Where is ICANN Compliance in ensuring that registrants know
            when their domain names are being investigated (e.g.,
            ensuring that registrars contact registrants re:
            investigation in a timely manner and with information about
            how to respond, and if not ICANN handles this function)?
          + How does ICANN Compliance evaluate complaints for harassment
            and "bullshit factor" -- someone reporting something in the
            Whois record that does not impact the reliability of the
            data or the reachability of the registrant (e.g., a student
            not having a cell phone due to financial constraints, but
            otherwise COMPLETELY reachable by email, regular mail, etc.)?
          + How can a registrant appeal a takedown of his/her/its domain
            name by ICANN Compliance -- and even investigate the details
            (registrants are going in circles trying to understand how
            their domain names disappeared).
          + What steps can Compliance take to throw out abuse by those
            filing complaints?  How can Compliance let the community
            know these anti-abuse steps are being taken?
      o

        Availability of transparent enforcement of contractual
        obligations data

      o

        The value and timing of RDAP as a replacement protocol

      o

        The effectiveness of any other steps ICANN Org has taken to
        implement WHOIS Recommendations

      o How have changes in law, high level court decision, adoption of
        data protection laws worldwide, etc, changed the legal framework
        of Whois and RDS data since the original Whois Review Team
        Report and how does this impact ICANN's work going forward.
      o

On 2/20/2017 6:15 PM, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>
> Please note this is our last kick at this can.  I really don't have 
> much guidance; I don't quite understand exactly what we are going to 
> study.....but I like the idea of 6 months.  Copying Kathy who 
> co-chaired the last one, she is most likely to be able to figure out 
> if this will work....
>
> Stephanie
>
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: 	[council] RDS Scope Guidance
> Date: 	Mon, 20 Feb 2017 19:31:56 +0000
> From: 	James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com>
> To: 	GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
>
>
>
> Councilors –
>
> Attached, please find a draft RDS Scope Guidance document, which 
> consolidates the feedback received from all SOs and ACs on 
> guidance/recommendations to limit the scope of the upcoming RDS 
> (WHOIS) review.  Time is tight, so if you have any comments or edits, 
> please respond by *2000 UTC this Friday 24 FEB.*
>
> Once completed, the RDS Scope Guidance document will be distributed to 
> RDS Review Team applicants, to confirm that they are still interested 
> in serving on this review team. There is also a proposal to extend the 
> call for applications until 7 MAR.
>
> Thank you,
>
> J.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170222/ea38cb9e/attachment.htm>