[gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] MP3 Thick Whois PDP Working Group - Tuesday 05 February 2013 at 15:00 UTC

[Julia Charvolen <julia.charvolen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

The next  Thick Whois PDP Working Group call will be on 12 February 2013 at 
15:00 UTC.


Please find the MP3 recording of the Thick Whois PDP Working Group call held on 
Tuesday 05 February 2013 at 15:00 UTC at:
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-thick-whois-20130205-en.mp3

On page:  http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#feb


The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master 
Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/


Attendees:
Marc Anderson – RySG
Roy Balleste – NCUC
Don Blumenthal - RySG
Avri Doria - NCSG
Amr Elsadr – NCSG
Alan Greenberg – ALAC
Volker Greimann – RrSG
Frederic Guillemaut – RrSG
Caroline Hoover – RySG
Susan Kawaguchi - CBUC
Marie-Laure Lemineur – NPOC
Steve Metalitz – IPC
Mikey O'Connor – ISPCP
Susan Prosser – RrSG
Tim Ruiz - RrSG
Jill Titzer – RrSG
Rick Wesson - RrSG

Apologies:
Iliya Bazlyankov – RrSG
Christopher George - IPC

ICANN staff:
Marika Konings
Berry Cobb
Lars Hoffmann
Julia Charvolen

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **


Mailing list archives:
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg/

Wiki page:
https://community.icann.org/x/whgQAg
 

Thank you.
Kind regards,
Julia Charvolen
For GNSO Secretariat
 

Adobe Chat Transcript:
Marika Konings:Welcome to the 'thick' Whois PDP Working Group meeting of 5 
February 2013
  Volker Greimann:Registrar draft is ready and has been commentedupon, now we 
merely need to consolidate the comments
  Volker Greimann:is "soon" betterthen "end of the week"?
  Volker Greimann:than
  Julia Charvolen:Steve is not on the call yet
  Julia Charvolen:Amr Elsadr joined the phone bridge
  Amr Elsadr:Hi..., I just joined the call.
  Julia Charvolen:Steve Metalitz joined the phone bridge
  Amr Elsadr:I also appreciate the dialogue that has been going on.
  Avri Doria:Our list is just a little scary for discussions.  Bunches of mean 
people waiting to bite at people's ankles.
  steve metalitz:Agree with Alan.
  Avri Doria:Even I have backed off it as a place for rational discussion.
  Tim Ruiz:We are still volunteers, correct? Just wanted to be sure I'm not 
missing a paycheck somewhere ;-)
  Marika Konings:The charter is posted here: 
https://community.icann.org/display/PDP/3.+WG+Charter
  Julia Charvolen:Susan Kawaguchi joined the meeting
  Rick Wesson:engineering icanns website is out of scope
  Alan Greenberg:No, but having a webb site that does not cause us to waste 
time by necessity is in scope.
  Avri Doria:'all that privacy stuff"
  Rick Wesson:define public
  Avri Doria:i do not think this PDPD can be resolved without resolving the 
privacy stuff
  marie-laure lemineur:i agree. we should rather speak of public access
  Roy Balleste:Agree with Avri and Alan
  Avri Doria:the issue is jurisdictional issues
  steve metalitz:Agree the question posed by Mikey is not within scope.
  Avri Doria:it is withing scope
  Roy Balleste:It is within the scope
  Avri Doria:i think the threat analysis is critical.
  Avri Doria:and do not beleive this PDP can be completed without this 
discussion.  and we cannot assume a US centric jurisdictional model.
  Roy Balleste:+1 Avri
  Avri Doria:Industry in the US is insisting on US jurisdictional models, but 
the EU is gearing up to fight this.  We are asking for trouble in moveing 
peoples datya from one jurisdictional to another.
  Volker Greimann:Alan +1
  Don:I think that we're only in these debates because nobody has taken a 
US-centric viewoint.
  Rick Wesson:Threat Analysis is not within scope
  Avri Doria:And we can analyse the different jurisdictional models.
  Don:Good point, Rick. Loose use of terms over the last week has concerned me.
  Tim Ruiz:All the privacy issues already exist in the existing thick 
registries, etc. If privacy is an issue it needs to be discussed outside of 
this PDP. If the consensus is that those privacy issues need to be resolved 
first, then we should not expand our own scope but report back to the Council 
to decide how to direct us to proceed.
  Avri Doria:The fact that we are waiting for a european court to files 
chanrges agaisnt whois for violating their privacy laws is not really a good 
way to look at things.
  Susan Prosser:Tim +1
  Volker Greimann:Threat assessment is only within scope if the threat is 
directly associated with the topics that are within scope, such as:   Impact on 
privacy and data protection,  Stability, Accessibility
  Don:I don't think that we're waiting on a European ruling.
  Carolyn Hoover:Tim +1
  Tim Ruiz:@Avri, that is an example of a reason why this PDP might need to be 
put on hold, but not an example of why we should just go off and expand our own 
scope.
  Avri Doria:we cannot finish a topic people beleive is invalid
  Amr Elsadr:I'm don't understand how discussing privacy is outside of the 
scope of this WG. It's clearly stated in our charter. Can someone explain why 
it is out of scope.
  Amr Elsadr:it was kind of hostile..., but I would rather focus on the issues 
the members are raising. :)
  Rick Wesson:This debaite has been ongoing for some 13 years, as has the rule 
making in many many countries
  Don:The thick whois requirement was in fact open for discussion.
  Tim Ruiz:@Amr, I don't believe it was intended in the way/direction some are 
trying to take it. If we go down that path, we fail, period.
  Rick Wesson:Has there been one case brought, one?
  Amr Elsadr:Thanks Tim...., but (quote from charter): "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?"
  Rick Wesson:on consensus, we may agree that there is an issue, consensus does 
not mean that we need to agree on how to resolve it, but that we agree on the 
issue.
  Tim Ruiz:@Amr, that can be answered by simply refering to the existing thick 
whois and ways in which ICANN has accomodated so far. We DO NOT need to discuss 
whether Whois should be public, who should have access, etc. That is a path 
that will lead to ultimate failure of this WG.
  Roy Balleste:+1 Rick
  Amr Elsadr:I, for one, feel that Alan's request for concrete examples is 
fair. I will do what I can to accomodate this request.
  steve metalitz:Rather than spend more time talking about what we should talk 
about, I suggest that Avri write up what she thinks our report ought to say on 
this topic and then we can react to a specific text (including the question of 
whether it is out of scope).  Also, wasn't the reason we set up a sub-group on 
privacy to have this discussion there? 
  Rick Wesson:How many ccTLDs use a thick whois model within europe?
  Avri Doria:i am not in the sub-group
  Don:The group isn't closed
  Avri Doria:alo it is more the jurisdictional issue that a privacy issue.
  Avri Doria:s/that/than/
  Rick Wesson:jurisdictional issues are clearly out of scope
  Avri Doria:well i am hoping that the ICANN report goes into the comparative 
jurisdictional issues.
  Volker Greimann:Rick, acrtually, it isn't:
  Volker Greimann:  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?
  Marika Konings:@Avri - which ICANN report are you referring to?
  Avri Doria:Also, Alans/ comment does not seem to pertain, since the THick is 
in the US and subject to US law.  The thin is in another country with another 
jurisdiction.
  Volker Greimann:the scope is defined by our charter
  Avri Doria:Marika: The question coming form the lawyers that Don spoke about?
  Rick Wesson:Given that should we review what is the current practice to 
determine impact?
  Amr Elsadr:@Tim..., My understanding of the “Procedure for Handling Whois 
Conflicts with Privacy Law” addresses what is expected of registrars within 
jurisdictions with privacy laws conflicting with the RAA, but does not clearly 
address cross-border transfer of whois data in bulk. Am I mistaken?
  Marika Konings:@Avri - If I understood Don well, he was referring to an email 
he sent to our General Counsel's office asking if they are aware of any court 
cases.
  Alan Greenberg:@Avri, calling it a jurisdictional issue is not sufficient in 
my mind. We need to understand what the implications of the jurisdictional 
differences are on Whois models
  Rick Wesson:restate
  Tim Ruiz:@Amr, it is exactly the same with registrars or with a thick 
registry. Keep in mind that ICANN can request bulk at any time, we send data in 
bulk to escrow agents, and anyone anywhere can request bulk whois from a 
registrar and we are contractually bound to provide it to them. So how are the 
issues different?
  Tim Ruiz:@Amr, I am not saying that issues are not valid, I am saying they 
are not unique to the Thick Whoid question and cannot be resolved here.
  Alan Greenberg:@don - +1
  Amr Elsadr:@Tim..., isn't the volume of data, which will be tranferred 
(especially with .com) unique? Just wondering? Is there a precedent for a 
massive volume of data like this being transferred across jurisdictions? 
Wouldn't that be relevant?
  Rick Wesson:the whois protocol has no capability to address any policy 
protections, in effect it can't enforce any kinds of rules
  Marc Anderson:Mike, can I point out that we have 5 minutes left.
  Tim Ruiz:Of course, .org. Do you really think there are different laws if it 
is a few hundred thousand or a few million versus tens of million?
  Marc Anderson:There is an ICANN new gTLD applicant Webinar that I'm sure many 
of us will be attending.
  Avri Doria:Companies collect all kind of info that they can or can't publish.
  Don:Excellent point, Rick.
  Roy Balleste:I do not think we need to resolve issues.  But at least, we 
should identify them.
  Avri Doria:We cannot slve this PDP until we solve the underlying issue.
  Marc Anderson:I need to drop off the call
  Jill Titzer:I also need to drop off
  Don:Along with gearing the privacy (maybe better to call it data protection?) 
group up, let's figure out how we're gong to approach the experts group.
  Volker Greimann:"Language, Mikey!" ;-)
  Don:We apparently need a 7 second delay.
  Tim Ruiz:Makes sense Rick.
  Amr Elsadr:who's leading the privacy subteam? Don?
  Amr Elsadr:OK. Thnx.
  Don:Just did via email
  Amr Elsadr:Thnx Don.
  marie-laure lemineur:than you Don for offering
  marie-laure lemineur:thk you
  Don:Oops. Forget my suggestion to change the name.
  Roy Balleste:Thank you!
  marie-laure lemineur:thks a lot
  Tim Ruiz:Thanks Mikey.