Logo

Julie Bisland's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Mark Svancarek (BC)
42:10
The text is too tiny for me. Please zoom in on display, thanks!
caitlin.tubergen
42:14
Here is a link to the message: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2019-September/002504.html
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
42:33
walk, don't run ;-)
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
43:02
He who hurries cannot walk with dignity.
Andrea Glandon
44:18
@mark, let me know if that is better
Mark Svancarek (BC)
47:01
Inputs from ICANN would be helpful
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
47:39
@Ashley I think that’s a very fair point we can try and weave into the letter
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
48:26
That would be great. Thanks Matt.
Terri Agnew
49:59
We see some joined via telephone number ending in 206, for attendance, can you identify yourself.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
50:12
Marc you are dropping out
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
51:59
Bullet number 4 suggests that maintaining a replica of the data is not the only option. However, asking ICANN about what it would be envisioning or willing to do in this regard could be useful
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
54:45
@Milton: +1.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
57:44
I agree with Leon, but we can nuance the questions in a way that recognizes the role of DPAs. That being said, we really need to know what ICANN is "willing" to accept.
Andrea Glandon
58:29
@Hadia, if you need a dial out, please let me know
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
58:37
Yes Leon makes a good point but I think ultimately the goal of the letter(s) was to try and avoid us getting to the end of our work making policy recommendations the Board is not willing to accept
Alex Deacon (IPC)
59:10
desirable or even necessary.
Marc Anderson (RySG)
59:32
Yes, good points Leon and Ashley - I also think the board and staff might also have important input and feedback on each of the options.... they might be ok with option B if certain conditions are met.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
59:45
+1 Matt
Marc Anderson (RySG)
59:58
+2 Matt
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:00:47
Good to get things in writing. :-)
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:01:56
I’m a little concerned with where this is going. Yes, we don’t want to come up with policy recommendations that the ICANN Board will not adopt, but I’d hate to see this become a situation where ICANN can only accept one (or a couple, few, etc…) scenario that limits what the EPDP Team and the GNSO are allowed to reach in terms of policy recommendations.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:03:08
sure!
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:03:18
I always add color
Marika Konings
01:05:47
Please see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hWT8narH9v3zaBkGllYq3t3zMDlwhQ9tp-RB9iUqMjU/edit to follow along with Alex’s overview.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:08:17
Marika: I think the email provides an easier to follow summary than the Google doc
Alex Deacon (IPC)
01:19:12
Janis - I just have a super quick comment after margie finishes if I may…..
Janis Karklins (Chair)
01:19:33
ok
Marc Anderson (RySG)
01:30:22
@Margie - you should remove references to WHOIS - probably better to use RDS (Registration Data Services) which presumably would be delivered with RDAP.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:31:14
I understand that Milton is proposing that ICANN be the accrediting body. If that is the case, does Milton's proposal then also take ICANN off the table as a potential entity to be the deciding body?
Margie Milam (BC)
01:31:29
good comment Marc - we need to come up with clearer definitions
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:32:41
@Ashley: not inherently, but of course NCSG does not want ICANN to be the decision maker with respect to disclosure
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:33:30
Actually ALL proposals have ICANN in an accreditation role; Alex wants them to accredit (and de-accredit) accreditors, I just see that as an unnecessary later
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:33:37
layer
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:34:23
Also, my idea of uniform accreditation standards does not exclude multiple accreditation bodies, they would just not represent user groups
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:35:54
Thanks for clarifying Milton.
Farzaneh Badii
01:38:14
Hello. Sorry for being so late. Had a meeting . But I was sure you have not finished early :)
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:42:23
Ashely what do you mean by the "identification functin?"
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:43:20
From what I gathered from Ashley’s comment, sounds good to me.
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:43:22
And transparency reports would be needed too (which country received how much data…)
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:43:25
The function of determining (in this case) LEA that should be given credentials. A separate body could be responsible for actually handing out the credential.
Alex Deacon IPC
01:43:37
it means the separating the authentication credential from the authorization credentials.
Alex Deacon IPC
01:43:43
I think
Alex Deacon IPC
01:44:01
I tried to update my framework to allow for this separation.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:44:06
Alex - in theory. We are still hashing out. We don't have a formal view yet.
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:44:16
@Alex: That’s what I understood as well. Sounds somewhat similar to what the TMCH is doing, doesn’t it?
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:44:56
Hmm I don’t agree with point 5
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:44:59
We also sent a very simplistic slide with our input that breaks things down. Not sure if Barry would be willing ot put on the screen.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:45:14
*Berry
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:45:24
@Ashley: Would you mind sharing the email/slides you referred to with the rest of the EPDP Team?
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:46:04
Just did...
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:46:12
Gratitude. :-)
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:46:17
IP requests from the undemocratic republic of dictatorship does differ from law enforcement requests.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:47:16
but then it is common sense that accred should not be linked to user groups
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:49:02
again I think we should remember GDPR is only one piece of regulation…we shouldn’t focus so much on it in our work...
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:49:19
Some articles have been referred to (42 & 43), but my understanding of those is that they certify controllers/processors, not requestors for disclosure.
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:49:24
Accreditation is one way of granting disclosure I believe.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:49:39
no it isn't
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:49:42
There may be others I have missed.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:50:03
we have agreed that accred helps with authentication but that authorization is a different process
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:50:14
+1 milton
Owen Smigelski (RrSG)
01:50:19
Agree with @Matt- CCPA will be here in a few months, and is different in many ways from GDPR.
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:50:31
@Milton: +1
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:50:56
I think it has to be individuals, right?
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:51:37
I think you accredit the organization and the obligations flow to any individuals they allow to interact with the SSAD…IMO
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:52:02
so who knows about accreditation?
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:52:47
+1 Matt. That sounds like a more practical approach.
Chris Lewis-Evans (GAC)
01:53:51
+1 Mark SV
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
01:54:22
+1 Matt
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:54:34
But who credits the accreditor of the accreditor?
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:55:03
Nice car.
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:55:16
@Berry: Is that your car parked in front of your house?! :-)
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:55:50
It’s not only Milton’s concern to have user groups by the way. I can say most of us at NCSG feel like that
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:56:33
getting into contractual relation with Icann is obnoxious?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:56:38
sure it does. WIPO represents TM users and other IPR holders
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:58:09
But if WIPO or whomever is not the party authorizing access, can't your concerns be clearly dealt with in safeguards?
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:58:38
Why are we suddenly all using “access” instead of “disclosure” again?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:58:44
agree with Greg this has to happen at the organization level, and organizations as a whole would be held legally accountable
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:59:06
Amr... read the GAC early input. :-)
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:59:21
Will do, Ashley. :-)
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:59:47
The BC accreditation proposal is riddled with “access” too.
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:03:01
@Milton: =1
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:03:07
Sorry…, meant +1
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
02:08:07
Aww thought you meant I was #1
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
02:08:18
;-)
Marc Anderson (RySG)
02:09:25
was time well spent Janis - this was an excellent discussion.
Mark Svancarek (BC)
02:11:18
No objection
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
02:19:55
#Chris so lets say so
Chris Lewis-Evans (GAC)
02:21:05
@Hadia yes hopefully make it clearer
Georgios Tselentis (GAC)
02:21:05
limited by the nececity to serve the purpose and not beyond that
Chris Lewis-Evans (GAC)
02:21:17
+1 Georgios
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
02:22:20
why am I not surprised? I thought we were on a deadline here?
Marc Anderson (RySG)
02:25:00
Registries are still working on this and will submit as soon as we are done.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
02:25:33
NCSG were not sure either, Mark
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
02:25:34
Yes! Clarification on intent of exercise would be great!!
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
02:27:54
I need to think about this.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
02:28:45
Not to speak for Georgios, but he has been a big advocate for assigning lawful basis to every step in the data flow process.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
02:29:09
Georgios... feel free to correct me. :-)
Caitlin Tubergen
02:29:42
Support Staff to create a table (in the form of a Google Doc) which includes a column for each lawful basis and a column for what a requesting party would be required to provide in its request, what is the expected response time, is automation likely, what are the standardized categories that may fall within that lawful basis, etc. Following receipt of the table, the EPDP Team members to populate the contents of the table. If there are commonalities, policy recommendations can be drafted accordingly.
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:30:10
Thanks, Caitlin.
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
02:31:00
Don’t you worry, Janis!
Marc Anderson (RySG)
02:31:09
good meeting, thanks all.
Chris Lewis-Evans (GAC)
02:32:22
Thanks all
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
02:32:23
Thank you bye for now
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:32:24
Thanks all. Bye.
Rafik Dammak (GNSO Council Liaison)
02:32:24
Thanks all