[NCSG-PC] [Draft] Letter to ICANN re: BC and IPC correspondence
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Sat Oct 14 00:53:38 EEST 2017
Fair enough. Let's have a bit of a discussion on the pc, about how
people feel.
Stephanie
On 2017-10-13 17:49, Martin Pablo Silva Valent wrote:
> I’ve been following the doc, it looks great. I would be much more
> mellow and diplomatic in the las paragraph, not threaten things, like
> going public with a campaign with data protection agencies. I think we
> shouldn’t promote agencies as policeman of ICANN, I understand we are
> waiving that in the event the multi-stakeholder model fails to include
> as as stakeholder, yet, I wouldn’t set that as precedent and I do not
> recommend to make it before the actual exclusion of the process
> happen, much less by by written official letter.
>
> I do believe that we have to talk about alternative strategies, but
> not in a letter like this, is a very big threat with deep implication,
> I wouldn’t recommend to go with that nor sign it as official NCSG
> position. Reminder: ONLY ABOUT THE LAST PARAGRAPH, the rest looks
> amazing and I still think we should make clear the point we must be
> taken in account. Just take away the threat.
>
> Cheers,
> Martín
>
>> On Oct 13, 2017, at 6:42 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Stephanie, I tend to agree. I have attached a copy of the
>> letter which includes the Chair's name.
>>
>> Ayden
>>
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] [Draft] Letter to ICANN re: BC and IPC
>>> correspondence
>>> Local Time: 13 October 2017 10:33 PM
>>> UTC Time: 13 October 2017 21:33
>>> From:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>> To: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>
>>> ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>>> <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is><ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>>> <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> <Proposed Letter - Chair
>> Name.pdf>_______________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20171013/91b415c1/attachment.htm>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list