Re: [gnso-dataprotection-thickwhois] Issues for Today
Dear Alan, You are eager as 1 hour early. Please relax for another 50 minutes. Cal at 1600 EST - 2100 UTC Thank you! Kind regards, Gisella On 20/02/2013 20:05, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >Is this call on today? No pone elese on Adobe except Gisella who has >not yet answered my messages and on adigo "waiting for the >subscriber" on code 3429. > >Alan > >At 20/02/2013 02:54 PM, Don Blumenthal wrote: > >>Hello, >> >>My day was derailed further by a family medical issue. I had hoped >>to synthesize the public comments further than in the staff summary >>and also raise some questions worth pursuing that I saw in the NCUC >>materials, but won't get through it. >> >>I'll limit myself to suggesting some threshold topics to cover >>today. Some came up last week but weren't addressed because of the >>call's free form. Order isn't important. Please feel free to add. >> >>1) What is our scope? Perhaps we should spend a few minutes looking >>at the WG's charter. In addition though, and just as a for instance, >>do we address issues that exist already with respect to thick vs >>thin or that exist regardless of the Whois context? We probably will >>have to, especially with regard to the first issue, because I'm hard >>pressed to think of something that would apply only prospectively. >>IN case you haven't looked at it recently, here is the link to the >>Charter. https://community.icann.org/display/PDP/3.+WG+Charter. The >>page also has a URL for the staff Thick Whois report, which has some >>relevant points. >>2) Will we limit ourselves to the comments or do additional research? >>3) How much research or analysis should we engage in? To take one of >>the documents from Ray as one example, are we in a position to >>question statements of the Article 29 working group or suggest that >>they don't apply? If the Article 29 opinion is determinative, do we >>also canvas other parts of the world or other international >>agreements such as APEC, or is the conflict point made sufficiently? >>4) Should we look at issues related to third party data handlers and >>service providers? >>5) Along with #3, can we analyze the effectiveness of laws and >>regulations? The EU Safe Harbor law, again a focus of the NCUC >>materials, is a case in point. As an alumnus of the US agency that >>ostensibly has the power to enforce it, I have a background and >>definite opinions on its value. >> >>FYI, I heard back from Dan Halloran in the GC's office. He did not >>know if the Whois conflict mechanism has been used but promised to >>forward my questions to the appropriate folks who work with >>registrars and registries. I haven't had responses to inquiries >>about the puntCAT RSEP. >> >>Talk to you at 4. >> >>Don > Attachment:
smime.p7s
|