Please review ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en**Members: reminder, when using chat, please select all panelists and attendees in order for everyone to see chat.

And now for the benefit of panellists and attendees: I like the language, Becky.

becky I have my hand

up

@Hadia we can barely hear you.

ok I shall re join

+1 Melina

This is what I wanted to say

+1 Melina’s point

So what is the merit of being so precise - just accurately describing what we want serves the purpose

@Stephan even if this is the case - whether we mention it or not has no benefit

+1 Margie

Agree to me too makes more sense

Reminder that these definitions are not the only definitions in the Google Doc.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vofZIqnY-xCaKMte1q_tiAwAfGwkwsu1/edit

As Becky has noted, the GDPR definitions are already captured in the terminology table.

Why are we reopening this? We have the GDPR terminology in it and use that as the basis for policy language. Exactly as it should be done

indeed, so we maintain GDPR definitions mentioned in the table and only add a line for 'emails anonymized vis-a-vis third parties"

I don't believe is misleading

On the contrary

a unique contact shall refer to the registrant not the registration

precisely. This is why I suggested deleting the B& B definitions

**Members: reminder, when using chat, please select all panelists and attendees in order for chat to be capture after the meeting.

sorry have to leave for another meeting - will go to mute / no sound mode and will try to come back

@ Margie: agree

I like: What risks remain?

Agree Margie

@Becky sorry - I was disconnected , please go ahead and rewritre the question

Note: Melina has to drop for another call.

I believe B&B stated in the prior memo that the current obligations appeared sufficient to meet the Accuracy principle

@Mathew this was before the new eu propsal

Margie, let’s deal with that then and not conflate it with a question on the adequacy of measures taken. The question to be asked here is what should be done to limit the risk of wrong self-identification and unlawful publication resulting thereof. It’s not about the data quality provided by the registrant.

That’s not how the B& B memo approaches accuracy

Just as a reminder, Becky cannot see the chat today, so I might suggest that comments be made verbally over text in the chat.

I am back

Hi melina

@Melina: we're on Q4 which is the one you submitted.

ok thanks

what is the debate?

Let’s not go KYC - the account holder would usually be the customer having the contract with the registrar.

Confirm - scheduled to go 30 more minutes

The current requirements are minimal - - email validation and formatting checks — no cross field validation or other verification

Yes-- I think that’s what I was lookin g for in this question

Thanks Keith

Melina and Margie - can you commit to rewriting this question by COB Friday so that the Legal Committee has time to review it prior to Tuesday’s meeting?

yes

Noted - although this question is already linked to the legal v. natural discussion we will try to further refine it

They are not disclosing based on consent

RIPE NCC is disclosing data based on 6(1)(f)

legitimate interest

RIPE NCC is relying on legitimate interest

With all due respect, I think the RIPE approach is questionable…

@Hadia, we are unable to hear you

Hadia, having trouble hearing you again.

I can’t. Hear Hadia

@Hadia, it sounds like your mic is very far away

Sorry, your arguments are lost to me

I am sorry no I won't be able to

Just because there boy next door jumps out of the window does not mean I have to...

RIPE-NCC states: 􀂳[f]acili􀁗a􀁗ing coo􀁕dina􀁗ion be􀁗􀁚een ne􀁗􀁚o􀁕k operators (network problem resolution, outage notification etc.)􀂫i􀁖 􀁗he one[purpose] that justifies the publication of personal data in the RIPE-NCC Da􀁗aba􀁖e􀂴, and 􀁗ha􀁗 􀂳i􀁗 i􀁖 clea􀁕 􀁗ha􀁗 􀁗he 􀁓􀁕oce􀁖􀁖ing of 􀁓e􀁕􀁖onal da􀁗a 􀁕efe􀁕􀁕ing 􀁗oa resource holder is necessary for the performance of the registry function, which is carried out in the legitimate interest of the RIPE community and􀁗he 􀁖moo􀁗h o􀁓e􀁕a􀁗ion of 􀁗he In􀁗e􀁕ne􀁗 globall􀁜 (and i􀁖 􀁗he􀁕efo􀁕e in acco􀁕dance 􀁚i􀁗h A􀁕􀁗icle 6.1.f of 􀁗he GDPR)

the study page 51

???

Sorry I just copied and pasted a paragraph which ended up as shown

Page 51 of the study says that RIPE NCC relies on 6(1)(f) for the publication of the data

Hi all, as we approach the end of today's special call, I respectfully request that members and alternates on the Legal Committee conduct work and homework in between the scheduled meetings, over email, or in separate conversations. With very limited time for the full group's work, it's critical for this group to advance its work in a timely manner. I think good progress is being made, but we need to be more focused and efficient in our use of time. Thanks for all your work!

Thank you Keith, thank you everyone

Had, I have my doubt that the blanket balancing test would pass legal review

Q3 = Becky

Q4 = Melina + Margie

Ok thank you all - bye for now