[NCSG-PC] Fwd: FW: [Soac-leaders-icann58] Alternative HIT - Data Protection Commissioners

[Stephanie Perrin]

Thanks to everyone who helped with this.  We are back to the HIT idea, 
many thanks to the GNSO and Chuck Gomes for support.  I am here at CPDP 
with Peter Kimpian, we will be working on the outline for the HIT and 
hope to confirm potential speakers on site.  Please do not drop the NCSG 
slot we have obtained, we need to brainstorm a bit aobut exactly what we 
use it for, probably to elaborate on details but it will depend on who 
comes.  I am going to propose we try hard to get the winner of the 
Champion of Freedom award to come, (to be announced at 6 pm tonight).

cheers Steph



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	FW: [Soac-leaders-icann58] Alternative HIT - Data Protection 
Commissioners
Date: 	Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:37:18 +0000
From: 	James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com>
To: 	Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, KIMPIAN Peter 
<Peter.KIMPIAN at coe.int>, kathy at kathykleiman.com <kathy at kathykleiman.com>
CC: 	Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>, Austin, Donna 
<Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, 
Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>



Stephanie  / Peter –

Please see thread below.  We have tentatively agreed to move the Data 
Commissioner “Summit” (need a better name) to a High Interest Topic 
(HIT) session at ICANN58 in Copenhagen.

Next Steps – We will get your team of volunteers (and anyone else you 
determine is necessary) in touch with the meeting planning staff.  In 
the interim, please put together a format & rough agenda for the 
session, along with a tentative list of Data Commissioners who plan to 
attend.

There’s still much to be done, but I think we’re headed in the right 
direction with this.


Thanks—

J.

*From: *<soac-leaders-icann58-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of "James M. 
Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com>
*Date: *Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 17:33
*To: *"Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch" 
<Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch>, "soac-leaders-icann58 at icann.org" 
<soac-leaders-icann58 at icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: [Soac-leaders-icann58] Alternative HIT - Data Protection 
Commissioners

Thank you, Thomas, and others who contributed their thoughts.

As indicated in the original message, I will ask the volunteers to 
develop and present an agenda for this session, and include a list of 
committed attendees (if available).  We will then work with Nick and 
Tanzi to get this added as an HIT.

Many thanks—

J.

*From: *"Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch" <Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch>
*Date: *Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 00:41
*To: *"James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com>, 
"soac-leaders-icann58 at icann.org" <soac-leaders-icann58 at icann.org>
*Subject: *AW: [Soac-leaders-icann58] Alternative HIT - Data Protection 
Commissioners

Dear all

First of all, i would like to thank James for his message below.

Then I would like to tell you that – given that this initiative to have 
a dialogue between the domain industry and data protection commissioners 
from Europe and other regions has been taken by the Council of Europe 
who is a GAC observer and that there seems to be widespread interest in 
having such a dialogue in Copenhagen – the GAC leadership has proposed 
the GAC to act as a “sponsor” or “facilitator” of such a dialogue.

While there is support to have such a dialogue, some GAC members raised 
some questions and concerns regard the formalities about the 
“sponsoring” or “facilitating” role of the GAC on this. I have now 
replied to them that in the end, I think these formal issues are less 
important. What is important is that, given the interest signalled from 
various parts of the ICANN community, we DO actually have such a dialogue.

Whether we deal with it as a HIT or we call it differently, is not 
really important to me. So if the GNSO is ready to act as a formal 
“driver” of this, I would not have any problem with this. Again, the 
important thing is that we move forward and find a time in the 
Copenhagen schedule to have this dialogue as I am convinced that this 
would help solve problems and avoid future problems with regard to 
incompatibilities between frameworks developed in ICANN and national or 
international data protection legislation…

Best regards

Thomas

*Von:*soac-leaders-icann58-bounces at icann.org 
[mailto:soac-leaders-icann58-bounces at icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *James 
M. Bladel
*Gesendet:* Montag, 23. Januar 2017 21:54
*An:* SOAC Leaders ICANN58 <soac-leaders-icann58 at icann.org>
*Betreff:* [Soac-leaders-icann58] Alternative HIT - Data Protection 
Commissioners

Dear SOAC Leaders / ICANN58 Planning Team –

During the GNSO Council last week, there was discussion of a session at 
ICANN58 that would address data protection concerns in our industry, and 
would be attended by data protection commissioners from throughout the 
EU.  These folks are especially interested in the ongoing work around 
WHOIS/RDS, and the Copenhagen location is easily accessible to 
prospective attendees.

Organizers of this session have asked the GNSO and other groups (GAC, I 
believe?) to support their inclusion on the meeting agenda. 
Additionally, as it appears that one of the HIT sessions may become 
available (Monday 1515-1645), I would like to propose that we consider 
repurposing this HIT slot to accommodate the growing interest in the 
“Data Protection Summit”.

If there is support among this group for proceeding, then I would ask 
the volunteer organizers of this session to produce an overview/agenda 
of their session, to ensure that the subject matter and format meets the 
expectations of all SO/ACs, and contributes to the furtherance of the 
RDS policy work already underway.  I recognize that this is coming 
fairly late in to the process, but am hopeful that our group can be 
flexible in its consideration of this request.  If we are unable to 
accommodate the proposal, please note that some version of this session 
will likely occur in Copenhagen anyway, albeit it would not enjoy an 
unconflicted HIT slot on the main schedule.

If possible, we should decide this week, so I can task the volunteers to 
either (a) develop the aforementioned session agenda, or (b) make 
alternative (non-HIT) scheduling arrangements.

Thank you,

J.

----------------

James Bladel

GNSO Chair

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170125/c1095a9a/attachment.htm>