[NCSG-PC] [Draft] Letter to ICANN re: BC and IPC correspondence
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Sat Oct 14 00:33:10 EEST 2017
It should be signed by the Chair on behalf of, in my view.
cheers Steph
On 2017-10-13 17:27, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have done some final polishing to the letter, and have attached a
> proposed final draft. I hope we may be able to reach agreement soon on
> sending this letter. Also - I was wondering, should it carry a name,
> perhaps of the Chair, or is it okay to be signed 'NCSG'?
>
> Many thanks, Ayden
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] [Draft] Letter to ICANN re: BC and IPC
>> correspondence
>> Local Time: 13 October 2017 7:59 PM
>> UTC Time: 13 October 2017 18:59
>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>> To: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>,
>> ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>>
>> I think it is the perfect tone for this letter. As we saw in Hong
>> Kong this month, our public silence is being manipulated and used to
>> make the false claim that we are being consulted with and are an
>> integral part of ICANN's efforts to comply with the GDPR, when we are
>> not. Thanks for these edits Stephanie. We need to reshape the
>> narrative and get it all documented.
>>
>> Ayden Férdeline
>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 7:14 pm, Stephanie Perrin
>> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I jumped in today (apologies for being anonymous, always forget my
>>> google password) and made quite a few changes. I like the idea, but
>>> I think we should be a bit more specific. In terms of informing the
>>> DPAs....Swineheart is trying to get people to the IWGDPT meeting in
>>> Paris, I think everyone has been briefed at the data commissioners
>>> meeting in Hong kong (remember a whole crew from ICANN went) that
>>> there is a draft statement coming. So they know we have been
>>> briefing them for two years, we need to sharpen that a bit.
>>>
>>> Let me know if you think it was a bit too strong. I will confess, I
>>> am losing my patience with this lot. They spend gobs of money
>>> gadding around trying to nullify end user rights. Totally ignore
>>> us. Ought to be ashamed of themselves.
>>>
>>> Stephanie
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-10-13 07:05, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>>> hi,
>>>>
>>>> reminder for everyone to review the letter and share comments.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2017-10-11 4:28 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
>>>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>>>>
>>>> Also - I have now revised this letter again taking into account
>>>> the helpful feedback that was received over the past 48 hours;
>>>> moving forward, please feel free to edit the document directly
>>>> if you have any changes you'd like to see made. Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Ayden
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] [Draft] Letter to ICANN re: BC and IPC
>>>>> correspondence
>>>>> Local Time: 10 October 2017 7:44 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: 10 October 2017 18:44
>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>
>>>>> To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>>>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>
>>>>> ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Rafik,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you very much for your comments.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be great if we could finalise this letter by Friday
>>>>> and perhaps even send it out that day. I very much welcome
>>>>> edits directly to the Google Doc; everyone on this list,
>>>>> please help write it and shape its contents!
>>>>>
>>>>> I would also like to propose that we write a monthly letter to
>>>>> ICANN on this topic until May 2018, when enforcement of the
>>>>> GDPR comes into effect. That way we can document for the data
>>>>> protection authorities that we have been informing ICANN in
>>>>> excess of six months of their need to comply with this
>>>>> regulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> The feedback from Nick Shorey on the PC call today - that we
>>>>> need to help engineer a conversation between the DPAs and
>>>>> their GAC representatives - is an interesting one, and one
>>>>> which seemed to have support in the chat. How would we go
>>>>> about this, however? Do we write to the GAC? Do we express
>>>>> this desire to them in Abu Dhabi during our face-to-face with
>>>>> them?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ayden
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] [Draft] Letter to ICANN re: BC and IPC
>>>>>> correspondence
>>>>>> Local Time: 10 October 2017 5:33 AM
>>>>>> UTC Time: 10 October 2017 04:33
>>>>>> From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>>> To: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>
>>>>>> ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ayden,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the draft,
>>>>>> it is important we make a point to voice our concerns and
>>>>>> influence the process. as we discussed before here and on the
>>>>>> last call we got 2 problems 1- our representatives in
>>>>>> taskforce not being informed 2- the last Data protection
>>>>>> conference (that is already passed)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for the current letter, indeed we should tweak the language
>>>>>> there ;) while we keep the substance. reading IPC letter, it
>>>>>> seems they reject the use case matrix and I understood from
>>>>>> previous comments you think that doesn't include our
>>>>>> perspective. I add few comments but I think we can add more,
>>>>>> in particular, our concerns in general regarding the process
>>>>>> and not just responding to BC and IPC requests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I ask other PC members to review the letter and share their
>>>>>> thoughts. I put the GDPR as a discussion item for today call.
>>>>>> We need a deadline to get this done and prior to Abud Dhabi
>>>>>> meeting if we may want to continue the discussion there and
>>>>>> depending on how things go with the cross-community session.
>>>>>> I propose that we reach a new version by this Friday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017-10-08 23:07 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline
>>>>>> <icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have drafted a letter to ICANN in response to the
>>>>>> recent correspondence received from the BC and the IPC.
>>>>>> You can read/edit it here.
>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/13ujYOpJFL0eNvjQCiNmsduFFbiUPQC5Wmbe9wHC2K6Q/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>> I know the language is provocative (intentionally so),
>>>>>> but this is a first draft -- and if you disapprove please
>>>>>> provide alternative language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best, Ayden
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>>>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20171013/1c4e23d2/attachment.htm>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list