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

[Rafik Dammak]

hi,

Thanks Kathy for the suggestions!
councilors have until 2000 UTC this Friday 24 FEB to suggest comments or
edits. so can we review the suggestions and we can submit them to the
council list as input from NCSG. please if you have any other comments or
suggestion, please suggest some wording for the document.

Best,

Rafik

2017-02-22 22:40 GMT+09:00 Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com>:

> 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
>
>
>    -
>
>       Whether RDS efforts meet the “legitimate needs of law enforcement,
>       promoting consumer trust and safeguarding registrant data.”
>       - 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.
>       -
>
>       How RDS current & future recommendations might be improved and
>       better coordinated for the benefit of all stakeholders.
>       -
>
>       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
>          -
>
>       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?
>          -
>
>       Availability of transparent enforcement of contractual obligations
>       data
>       -
>
>       The value and timing of RDAP as a replacement protocol
>       -
>
>       The effectiveness of any other steps ICANN Org has taken to
>       implement WHOIS Recommendations
>       - 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.
>       -
>
> 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> <jbladel at godaddy.com>
> To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org> <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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170223/18946eef/attachment.htm>