[gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] here's a copy of the mind-map and the chat transcript from today's call
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">hi all,<div><br></div><div>i'm pushing this out mostly as documentation -- it will be very confusing to those of you who missed the call. please wait for Marika's note -- she got stuck with the action item of coming up with the next draft of a proposal. but there was a lot on the screen and i just want to share what i did in the interests of transparency. i'm also attaching a copy of the mind-map file at the bottom. you can read it directly by going and grabbing a copy of the free software that created it -- here's the link -- <a href="http://freemind.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Download";>http://freemind.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Download</a></div><div><br></div><div>thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>mikey</div><div><div apple-content-edited="true"> <!-- ^ Position is not set to relative / absolute here because of Mozilla --><p>Thick Whois 15-Oct </p><ul><li><span id="show1_1" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1" class="foldopened">-</span> Marika's <ul id="fold1_1" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><span id="show1_1_1" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1" class="foldopened">-</span><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri">The WG recommends that as part of the implementation process due consideration is given to potential privacy issues that may arise from the discussions on the transition from thin to thick Whois, including, for example, guidance on how the long-standing contractual requirement that registrars give notice to, and obtain consent, from each registrant for uses of any personally identifiable data submitted by the registrant should apply to registrations involved in the transition. Should any privacy issues emerge from these transition discussions that were not anticipated by the WG and which would require additional policy consideration, the Implementation Review Team is expected to notify the GNSO Council of these so that appropriate action can be taken. </span></i><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri"></span></p> <ul id="fold1_1_1" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><span id="show1_1_1_1" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_1" class="foldopened">-</span> Objections <ul id="fold1_1_1_1" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><p>Legal review was a compromise </p><p>Now ICANN legal doesn't have competance -- this is about protecting registriants -- if we need to go outside to obtain that competance, </p><p><span id="show1_1_1_1_1" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_1_1" class="foldopened">-</span> Is this just proposing to move ahead, following normal processes? </p><ul id="fold1_1_1_1_1" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><p>Answer: change focus from ID'ing problems to focusing on how those problems are dealt with if they're found </p><p>Answer: IRT has mechanism to revisit issues if they arise during implementation </p><p>Answer: Hard to prove a negative. Not sure how going to more experts will help. We'll always be open to the criticism that we haven't sufficiently explored the realm </p></li> </ul><p><span id="show1_1_1_1_2" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_1_2" class="foldopened">-</span> Are GAC representatives the right people to talk to on privacy issues? Maybe data-privacy commissioners, Article 29 committee people. The hope for the legal review was to get in touch with these folks during the implementation process </p><ul id="fold1_1_1_1_2" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><p>We need a broader survey of the legal realm -- data commissioners, private practice, academics. Needed because there hasn't been a historical interest from the GC's office </p><p>GAC members tend not to be the right folks -- we could approach them as a gateway to *find* the right people </p></li> </ul></li> </ul> </li> <li><span id="show1_1_1_2" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_2" class="foldopened">-</span> Possible approach -- insert legal review into the implementation process in Marika's text <ul id="fold1_1_1_2" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li>Question: what should be included? </li> <li><span id="show1_1_1_2_1" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_2_1" class="foldopened">-</span> Objection: <ul id="fold1_1_1_2_1" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li>Make sure that we don't create a never-ending circular process </li> <li>Please don't soften the rest of what Marika proposed -- a great way to ID issues and garner support </li> </ul> </li> <li><span id="show1_1_1_2_2" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_2_2" class="foldopened">-</span> Request: that scope be limited somewhat <ul id="fold1_1_1_2_2" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li>permutations of registry, registrants, registrars, jurisdictions -- there has to be a limit </li> <li>We could come up with a list of tightly framed questions </li> <li>maybe a sample -- we could choose -- use Alan's words as an example </li> <li>Board would need to approve this expenditure -- so there's a process for that </li> </ul> </li> <li>Request: that staff have *some* flexibility in how they deliver </li> <li><span id="show1_1_1_2_3" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_2_3" class="foldopened">-</span> Possible language <ul id="fold1_1_1_2_3" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li>Difference of privacy regimes across borders </li> <li>Go outside -- per Don's point </li> <li><span id="show1_1_1_2_3_1" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_2_3_1" class="foldopened">-</span> Alan's <ul id="fold1_1_1_2_3_1" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><p>We want a high degree of comfort that ICANN, the registry involved, and the registrars involved will not be in violation of privacy legislation if a transition from thick to thin WHOIS is carried out. </p><p>A sample of registrar should include those sponsoring large a plurality of the applicable registrations as well as a sampling of the larger registrants in jurisdictions with particularly stringent privacy laws (perhaps selected EU countries, Canada, selected Asia-Pacific countries). </p><p>For registries and registrars, I would suggest that such a comfort level could be reached by consulting with the selected registry and registrars, with the presumption that they will consult their own legal counsels if needed. </p></li> </ul> </li> <li><span id="show1_1_1_2_3_2" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_1_1_2_3_2" class="foldopened">-</span> Steve's <ul id="fold1_1_1_2_3_2" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><div> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><p>• the main question ought to whether a registrant whose Whois data is currently made publicly available through a registrar in country A would suffer any incremental legal harm or exposure if the same data were also made publicly available through a (thick) registry in the US, as is the case now with all registrations in US-based thick registries that are sponsored by non-US registrars. </p><p>• The review should also consider whether the current contractual framework can be used to ameliorate any harms found or whether it needs to be adjusted to accommodate this. For example, as an implementation matter, it could be useful for ICANN to provide guidance on how the long-standing contractual requirement that registrars give notice to, and obtain consent, from each registrant for uses of any personally identifiable data submitted by the registrant should apply to registrations involved in the transition. See sections 3.7.7.4 through 3.7.7.6 of the RAA (not changed from the 2009 to 2013 versions). </p></li> </ul> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> </li> </ul><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri; ">The WG recommends that following the adoption of this report and recommendations by the GNSO Council, the subsequent public comment forum (prior to Board consideration) as well as the notification by the ICANN Board to the GAC, specifically requests input on any considerations related to the transition from thin to thick Whois that would need to be taken into account as part of the implementation process. </span></i><span
style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:calibri'></span
style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:calibri'></p> </li> </ul> </li> <li><span id="show1_2" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_2" class="foldopened">-</span> Volker's <ul id="fold1_2" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><p>• Do the general registration terms of most registrars cover such a move? I would argue they do already for any registrar I have seen. </p><p>• What are the data protection requirements that the registry operator must meet prior to being able to receive the data? </p></li> </ul> </li> <li><span id="show1_3" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_3" class="foldopened">-</span> Steve's <ul id="fold1_3" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><div> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><p>• the main question ought to whether a registrant whose Whois data is currently made publicly available through a registrar in country A would suffer any incremental legal harm or exposure if the same data were also made publicly available through a (thick) registry in the US, as is the case now with all registrations in US-based thick registries that are sponsored by non-US registrars. </p><p>• The review should also consider whether the current contractual framework can be used to ameliorate any harms found or whether it needs to be adjusted to accommodate this. For example, as an implementation matter, it could be useful for ICANN to provide guidance on how the long-standing contractual requirement that registrars give notice to, and obtain consent, from each registrant for uses of any personally identifiable data submitted by the registrant should apply to registrations involved in the transition. See sections 3.7.7.4 through 3.7.7.6 of the RAA (not changed from the 2009 to 2013 versions). </p></li> </ul> </li> <li><span id="show1_4" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_4" class="foldopened">-</span> Alan's <ul id="fold1_4" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><p>We want a high degree of comfort that ICANN, the registry involved, and the registrars involved will not be in violation of privacy legislation if a transition from thick to thin WHOIS is carried out. </p><p>A sample of registrar should include those sponsoring large a plurality of the applicable registrations as well as a sampling of the larger registrants in jurisdictions with particularly stringent privacy laws (perhaps selected EU countries, Canada, selected Asia-Pacific countries). </p><p>For registries and registrars, I would suggest that such a comfort level could be reached by consulting with the selected registry and registrars, with the presumption that they will consult their own legal counsels if needed. </p></li> </ul> </li> <li><span id="show1_5" class="foldclosed" style="POSITION: absolute">+</span> <span id="hide1_5" class="foldopened">-</span> Amr's <ul id="fold1_5" style="POSITION: relative; VISIBILITY: visible;"><li><p>Addressing the transfer of the registration data instead of the exposure covers both scenarios; the rights afforded to both existing and future registrants by legal/privacy protections.</p><p> </p></li> </ul> </li> </ul><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; ">Chat transcript</span></div><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "><br></span></div><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:Welcome to the Thick Whois WG Meeting of 15 October 2013</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Hello all. Dialling in now.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Don Blumenthal:Furious already? We haven't even started</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Just joined the call.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Volker Greimann:nice, we now have to accept behavioral standards before logging in!</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Is the notice for standards of behaviour specially posted for this WG??!! :)</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Mike O'Connor:lol</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Mike O'Connor:doubt it</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Volker Greimann:we fight hard and party harder</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Mike O'Connor:right on!</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:Made me wonder as well, but I had the same notice when I logged in for a webinar earlier today ;-)</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Nathalie Peregrine:Susan Prosser is also noted for attendance purposes</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Nathalie Peregrine:Roy Balleste has joined the call</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Nathalie Peregrine:As has Tim Ruiz</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:I know. Apologies about that.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:@Alan - yes, there is a requirement for the Board to notify the GAC if they are considering policy recommendations that may have an impact on public policy (which in practice means they are notified of any policy recommendations that go to the Board as the GAC is responsible for making the determination of whether it impacts public policy).</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> steve metalitz:Agree with Tim and Alan re using Marika's suggestion. </span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Chris George:+ 1 Markia's suggestion</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Alan Greenberg:Message to EWG also indicates difficulty.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Nathalie Peregrine:Don is not on the audio bridge</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Don Blumenthal:I think my mic is back.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:Allof Mariak's recommendation Plus external legal review would be ok.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:+1 Avri we agree with Marika, but with/plus external review</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Tim Ruiz:IMHO, Marika's suggestion allows for ample opportunity for anyone with further concerns to get those concerns raised during implementation and during the comment period. I think this is good since we clearly cannot agree on how we do it or if we should do it here and now.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> steve metalitz:ICANN deals with governments through GAC representatives. </span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:Also forgot to mention that the EWG legal memo specifically addresses transition of data</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Tim Ruiz:My concern is that if we continue to insist and succeed in a legal review at this point, it will bet glossed over and that will be the end of it. Marika's suggestion allows for a broader approach to get included.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:@Don..., that is exactly what I was hoping for during the legal review hand-in-hand with implementation.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:+1Amr; Don</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:Is Alan comparing privacy concerns to loch ness?</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:Privacy Protection is a hypothetical?</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Don Blumenthal:Nobody is looking for a guarantee.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:@Avri - I think Alan refers to privacy issues in relation to the transition from thin to thick, not Whois in general </span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:+1Don</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:no guarantee, i am willing to accept you level of comfort post consulting with experts. </span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:+1Avri</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:@Avri, Roy - how about asking those experts to provide input to the public comment forum?</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:to the implementation team mechanisms you have proposed.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Don Blumenthal:@Marika. As Carlton said, the audience for the memo found it lacking. </span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Alan Greenberg:Avri, I was not comparing Whois or thick whois to the loch ness monster. I was referingto the impossibility of definitively prooving the non-existance of anything.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:@Marika..., your concern seems pretty justifiable. Clearer language is called for regarding expectations on what we are referring to as a legal review.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:we can't prove global warming either, that is a red herring.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Alan Greenberg:But for global warming, there are PLENTY if indications of a problem. I am asking for similar indications here.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:Alna,not enough to make me beleive.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:@Volker..., thanks. That's what I suspected.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> steve metalitz:Agree with Tim. Marika's is the most practical approach. </span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:@Tim..., I agree with you in principle. I also understand Marika's concern, which I feel is justified. We should encourage clearer and more precise recommendations.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Last week..., I asked what a legal review is exactly!! :)</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Alan Greenberg:Mikey, please make sure to add "privacy denyer" to my mindmap</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:@Amr - I have no problem with adding the words legal review as long as it aligns with what I've explained is the role of the GCs office (and the example question identified in the draft language). If it is something broader than that, the WG should be more specific about that is meant or what is expected.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:@Marika..., I get it. I also agree.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:+1 Amr; Marika I think we are getting close.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Tim Ruiz:How about - legal review of applicable privacy law? Just shooting from thehip.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:@Tim, Avri - my understanding was that this was limited to any privacy considerations in relation to the transition of data? Your language shounds much broader .....</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Tim Ruiz:@Marika, got it. How about - legal review of law applicable to the transition of data - or something like that.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> steve metalitz:As ntoed in my e-mail I did not think Alan's wording was the right approach. </span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:the problem statement can be written</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Marika Konings:@Tim - that sounds better, and as said, it seems that some of that has already been covered in the EWG review.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Tim Ruiz:@Marika, add - ...that has not already been considered by the EWG?</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Don Blumenthal:I agree about excellent progress over the last few days and today. Have to drop.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Bye Don.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:and t make sure the implementation matches the policy intent</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Avri Doria:i will be at IGF next week and wil miss this meeting. Will follow the list.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Yes. Sure.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:Sounds good Marika.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Thanks everyone.</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Roy Balleste:Thank you!</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Tim Ruiz:Thanks Mikey! Thanks all!</span><br style="font-size: medium; "><span style="font-size: medium; "> Amr Elsadr:Bye.</span></span></div><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "><span style="font-size: medium; "><br></span></span></div><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "><span style="font-size: medium; "><br></span></span></div><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "></span></div></span></div></div></body></html> Attachment:
Thick Whois 15-Oct.mm <html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "></span></div><div apple-content-edited="true"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; "><br></span></div>PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: <a href="http://www.haven2.com";>www.haven2.com</a>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)</span> </div> <br></div></body></html> Attachment:
smime.p7s |