RE: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] a modest amendment to our charter point on "privacy and data protection"

["Hoover, Carolyn" <CHoover@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Avri,

Are these the 3 rights described in some place where the description is
generally accepted as valid?  In other words, would the working group
have to define these or has this already been done?

Carolyn

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 2:56 PM
To: Gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx DT
Subject: Re: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] a modest amendment to our charter
point on "privacy and data protection"


Hi,

I am sorry to hear that you consider the Impact of Rights a distraction.

However, the PDP process mandates that rights impact analysis be done.
So this amendment is making explicit  something that the new PDP process
requires.

Privacy is only one of the rights that needs to be protected.  And
Privacy rights only pertain to individuals, while the Freedom of
Association pertains to associations of individuals, which are also
subject to WHOIS and often exclude from protections since they are not
natural persons.

avri

On 13 Oct 2012, at 14:27, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

> 
> 
> On 13 October 2012 12:16, Jonathan Zuck <jzuck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Just seems like a discussion of "rights" is fraught with pitfalls
given the time it will take to define them worldwide. Shouldn't we be
focused on the delta of privacy protection?
> 
> 
> 
> +1
> 
> I am against the amendment as proposed. There will already be an
addressing of rights in the core doc. The proposed revision adds little
except an invitation to further distraction on an issue that has already
dragged on too long.
> 
> - Evan
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: owner-gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
> Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 11:33 AM
> To: Gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx DT
> Subject: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] a modest amendment to our charter point
on "privacy and data protection"
> 
>  
> 
> hi all,
> 
> Avri wasn't able to make the last-minute-Monday call to hammer on this
last remaining issue.  she and i visited a bit about this yesterday and
came up with the following amendment to one of our bullets.
> 
> i view this as a friendly amendment in that is does a better job of
defining the "container" for the "rights" discussion in our charter.
yes, it's a bit broader, but i don't think it's *that* much broader and
it does a good job of clarifying the issue i was trying to push us
through too quickly on the last "normal" call.
> 
> sorry about the late-breaking news.  i'd be really interested to hear
from people who have a violent reaction.  as i said, i think this a
modest and helpful clarification of the charter topic.
> 
> mikey
> 
> 
> Current language:
> 
>  
> 
> Impact on privacy and data protection: how would 'thick' Whois affect
privacy and data protection, also taking into account the involvement of
different jurisdictions with different laws and legislation with regard
to data privacy as well as possible cross border transfers of registrant
data?
> 
> 
> 
> Proposed language:
> 
> Impact on rights: how would 'thick' Whois affect rights such as
Privacy, Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association as well as
adherence to data protection regulations,  taking into account the
involvement of different jurisdictions with different laws and
legislation with regard to data privacy as well as possible cross border
transfers of registrant data?
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE:
OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Evan Leibovitch
> Toronto Canada
> Em: evan at telly dot org
> Sk: evanleibovitch
> Tw: el56
>