Logo

Julie Bisland's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Rafik Dammak (GNSO Council Liaison)
41:23
hello all
Marika Konings
41:59
FYI, working definitions can be found here: https://community.icann.org/x/-5WjBg
Georgios Tselentis (GAC)
44:05
Laureen Kapeen is the representative for the GAC
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
44:08
I think the NCSG names are missing
Marc Anderson
45:12
sorry I'm late
Marika Konings
45:18
As a reminder, the action item was: Each group to nominate one person for the representative legal committee and provide the nomination to the Chair in advance of the next meeting, Wednesday, 12 June.
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
46:05
group was stakeholder group, not constituency though, right?
Margie Milam (BC)
47:55
constituency makes sense
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
48:32
we can’t have 3 reps from CSG and 1 from NCSG.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
48:43
Constituency does not really make sense to us. However, if you insist on constituency then we have Tatiana, Farzi and Stephanie
Mark Svancarek (BC) (MSFT)
48:50
We've always said that we had no objection to multiple NCSG members
Mark Svancarek (BC) (MSFT)
48:56
That has not changed
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
49:06
Thanks Mark. Appreciate it.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
49:08
Except that when I tried to join I was blocked
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
49:18
as long as this group does not vote...
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
49:21
However, thanks for your support Mark!
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
50:02
and my apologies for being late. Either me or my laptop need to take that Zoom course, apparently we are slow learners....
Alex Deacon (IPC)
51:16
For the record IPC also supports multiple NCSG members on the committee.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
51:57
I support a separate legal committee mailing list. Not only for the reasons Amr is providing (which I support), but for email management purposes.
Brian King (IPC)
52:17
+1 Kristina
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
52:22
Thanks, Janis. That’s very helpful.
Marika Konings
52:27
I believe we still have a separate mailing list in operation so it should be easy to update it with the new membership and add those interested to receive the emails as observers
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
52:31
Thank you, Janis.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
52:37
Excellent, Marika.
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
52:42
@Marika: Thank you too.
Marika Konings
52:59
Or maybe the easier question is to ask who does not want to be added as an observer, but we can follow up on that separately.
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
53:34
No objection to multiple NCSG members
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
53:40
Thanks, Hadia.
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
54:00
Fully supportive of multipole NSCG members as needed
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
54:09
NCSG even :)
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
54:23
Well to be honest while I appreciate non-objection I gotta tell you that it is our right to be treated equally to CSG. Which is not always the case
James Bladel (RrSG)
54:27
Yes, more folks from MSNBC
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
54:28
Thanks, Matt, on behalf of both the NCSG and the NSCG. ;-)
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
54:50
@Farzi Totally agree
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:00:26
why did you do this, Marika? We explained in the last meeting why we should not do it that way
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:01:06
We spent months defining purposes in Phase one of this EPDP, why are we starting from scratch based on a pre-GDPR policy?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:01:52
Academic research e.g. is a purpose that has not basis in GDPR
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:02:13
Didn’t we we agree on doing 3rd party legitimate interests. Also it’s not third party purpose. It’s legitimate interest. We discussed this in phase 1 to say legitimate interest not purpose. Volker said it too in his email
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:02:33
head----->desk
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
01:02:47
+1 Milton
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:02:47
disclosure, not access
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:03:16
right, legitimate interest not purpose
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
01:03:52
Just to be clear + 1 only with regard to the starting point of the document
Brian King (IPC)
01:04:19
Legitimate interest is one legal basis
Brian King (IPC)
01:04:40
Third parties may have several legal bases
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:05:00
+1 Marika
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:05:27
@Brian: That’s qualified in 61f, of course.
Brian King (IPC)
01:06:11
sure, "legitimate interest" is 6.1(f) and has a balancing test
Brian King (IPC)
01:06:26
there are other legal bases we need to consider
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:06:45
@Brian: Exactly. Legitimate interests of the controller and 3rd parties must not override the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:06:51
other legal bases still come under the category of legitimate purposes.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:07:46
Because we are all totally swamped I think is the answer to Janis’ question.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:07:53
We can barely cope
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:07:54
third party legitimate interest
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:07:57
full time jobs Janis. We are stretched thin.
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:08:21
@Janis: Considering the amount of material from the past few weeks that I need to catch up on, it seems the pace has been very aggressive. Not surprised that comments are coming in late.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
01:08:27
Full time jobs. Families. Elder care. health issues. do I need to keep going?
Alan Woods (RySG)
01:08:42
+1 Kristina!
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:08:47
@Kristina: +1000
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
01:08:49
"Why did you not speak up two days ago?" is not a very constructive way to find consensus.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:08:58
yes +1 Kristina.
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:09:13
+1 Kristina…these calls have generally been the place where feedback is provided on things circulated on the list
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:10:50
@Alan W: +1
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:10:52
that point Alan is making, he made it last time. Why wasn’t it taken into account? Why do we have to repeat ourselves?
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
01:11:01
Alan's voice "choppy" hard to understand.
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:11:18
Sounds good here
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:12:28
Hadia on the other hand is hard to hear
Marc Anderson (RySG)
01:12:30
Hadia is cutting out for me
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:12:30
Hadia’s line seems to be cutting out a bit
Terri Agnew
01:12:42
Hadia’s audio is back
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:12:50
Oh…, thought it was my line.
Brian King (IPC)
01:16:19
that's wrong, Milton
Brian King (IPC)
01:16:28
legitimate interest is just one legal basis
Brian King (IPC)
01:16:36
thanks :-)
Brian King (IPC)
01:16:42
I won't agree with that
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:16:59
C’mon Brian…, be agreeable. ;-)
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
01:17:03
All, we have revised our approach and methodology during our work in phase 1, so that is something we need to accept as a possibility for this phase 2. In my view we should not discuss a specific format for much longer, but just dive into one case / scenario and go through that. That will help us understand what obstacles we face and we can then work based on our findings.
Georgios Tselentis (GAC)
01:17:28
+1 Thomas
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:17:30
What cases and scenarios Thomas?
Margie Milam (BC)
01:17:33
+1 Thomas
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
01:17:49
You pic one, Farzaneh.. I do not care.
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
01:17:57
Pic - pick!
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
01:18:10
Let’s just get the ball rolling
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:18:16
what is the definition of "academic research"?
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:18:34
(just an academic question)
Berry Cobb
01:18:34
In a prior version, it felt odd to start the first box of the table defined as "Legitimate Interest". As Marika noted, the use of "Purpose" in the charter tripped this exercise up. In the end, a 3rd Party will define their own purpose that in turn provides the a legitimate interest to be evaluated when requesting disclosure. Because of the improper use of "purpose" in the charter and as Milton stated from the last call, "3rd Party Purpose" was used as the title.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:18:48
Milton - I'm pretty confident that no one thinks that.
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:18:49
but we can’t agree to come up with all sorts of scenarios and have dozens of user groups to give them access.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:19:00
Enjoy the ride, Alex
Margie Milam (BC)
01:19:26
the purposes is just the first step. We have to deal with Milton's questions about what limits/rules apply later --
Brian King (IPC)
01:19:40
The use of the word "purpose" in the charter is not improper
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
01:19:57
Farzaneh - agreed. We cannot agree on all sort of scenarios, but why don’t we start with ONE :-). As I said many times before, we need to slice and dice. And I would focus on private requestor’s disclosure requests for starters.
Mark Svancarek (BC) (MSFT)
01:20:24
I agree, let's do one, then 3, then 5
Berry Cobb
01:21:33
To assist Janis, please lower your hand after speaking. Thank you.
Marika Konings
01:22:06
and to emphasize again, the list is intended to be a starting point to identify for what reasons a third party may request disclosure. This does not mean that these would result in a guaranteed or automatic disclosure, but we just want to make sure that you have the full horizon to start from and then work your way down through the related questions that need to be answered.
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
01:22:07
@Alan: Much better - back to your old self!
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:22:46
Designating a group and members of a group doesn't assume access/disclosure will be granted. Can we just accept that and move forward?
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:22:58
+1 Alan and Thomas
Brian King (IPC)
01:23:03
+1 Ashley
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:23:09
Because not everyone seems to think that way @Ashley
Margie Milam (BC)
01:23:15
+1 Ashley
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:23:19
Who thinks that way Milton?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:23:47
Ask me in Marrakech
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:23:59
with a tall drink
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:24:05
Yes
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:24:13
why are we designating user groups then? I thought the point was to decide what data should be disclosed to them which I disagree with ‘
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:24:42
Because groups can provide a streamlined access model. For purposes of accreditation for example.
Marika Konings
01:25:01
My understanding is that if there are certain user groups that can be designated, it may facilitate authentication / authorization, but as Alan noted, not everyone may fit in a user group so the group would need to accommodate for that as well.
Alan Woods (RySG)
01:25:03
agreed Ashley ... but can we please just be clear that every request for disclosure is to be considered in the same amnner. There are no Special disclosees, (not including those with actual legal powers). We should break this down by legal basis not purpose.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:27:42
I would like what Alan just said about no presumption of disclosure to be written down and signed in blood by all EPDP members ;-)
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:28:33
Steph you are muted
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:28:37
Steph mic not working
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:29:04
I generally agree with what Alan said but would also caution that I don’t know that it’s that simple…for example a third party that claims trademark rights should get access to certain domain names but certainly not things unrelated to their trademarks
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
01:29:35
Steph: every time the document is changed you need to select "exit full screen mode" again
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:29:36
@Alan G: If I understood you correctly, your thoughts about using user groups to handle the easily identified cases has merit. Thanks.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:29:39
Steph enlarge the participants list and there is an "unmute me" button on the bottom
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:30:13
but it's a separate window so it can fall behind another window if you click on the other window and it is maximized
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
01:32:12
@Stephanie: if you are on a PC, Alt-A mutes and unmutes.
Alan Woods (RySG)
01:34:12
+ 1 Thomas
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
01:34:23
@Amr, I think that is right. User groups are a convenient way of grouping together "similar" requestors and those who may eventually be authorized/authenticated by a similar means. But being part of that group just helps delineate the requestor, not provide a gtee.
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:35:16
We don’t have to have user groups to do that Alan. We can have types of requests.
Brian King (IPC)
01:35:39
Agree with Thomas
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:35:39
No, what Alan G was talking about was not user groups but types of requests
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
01:36:13
@ Thomas I totally agree with your appoach
Brian King (IPC)
01:36:33
I'd be happy to work with Thomas on that
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:36:33
@Farzaneh: Agree. Types of requests can probably satisfy the scenarios Alan G described earlier.
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
01:36:42
* approach
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
01:36:49
@Farzanah, my understanding was that the concept of user groups was to identify the differeing types of accreditations we may evenually use (ie IP lawyers vs security professionals).
Alex Deacon (IPC)
01:37:15
Sounds like a great approach - thanks Thomas.
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:38:01
Seems like a logical approach to me
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
01:38:36
Thanks, Janis and staff!
Marc Anderson (RySG)
01:38:45
I was just raising my hand to support Thomas' approach
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:38:49
we can talk about accreditation later. We haven’t agreed on how to disclose data yet
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:39:06
You see, this is why we object to the idea of groups, because of the link to "accreditation." The assumption there is that if you belong to group X you have a presumptive right to disclosure
Brian King (IPC)
01:39:19
Who's assuming that, Milton?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:40:04
Ummm, you?
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
01:40:26
+1 Milton. I think we're going to need a lot of disclaimers and footnotes at the beginning.
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:40:40
I think CPs are in the best positions to provide the first list of types of requests because they have been getting them. Doesn’t mean all are legitimate but I think we can start from there.
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
01:40:51
@Milton, that exactly opposite to what I said. Being accreddited does not give you the right to disclosure. It gives you the right to make a request and the details of that request will given whether it is honoured.
Ashley Heineman (GAC)
01:41:08
Accreditation doesn't assume access/dislosure either
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:41:43
Thanks for all the help. I must say, I never missed Adobe more than now.
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
01:41:47
sounds reasonable
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:41:47
Still a method to disclose. We are not at that stage yet
Brian King (IPC)
01:43:12
Milton I think we all know there's more to it than that. Let's talk more soon.
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
01:44:11
@Steve, Does your BBQ only have tech experts or have you included civil society charcoal too?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:45:15
We might be the grilled chicken
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:45:45
more like shrimp Milton.
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
01:48:35
<<squawk>>
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
01:50:40
Will this preso be circulated to the list?
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
01:50:57
@Matt: I’d hope so.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:51:00
We would be happy to help you Steve. You need to figure out your policy assumptions in this thing, we can help with that.....
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
01:51:49
Milton, I always think of you as a bantam rooster. Loudest cock-a-doodle-do in the barn…..
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:00:01
@Steve: What determines the sensitivity level of the “request”?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
02:03:18
answer: law and policy
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
02:06:33
Registry becomes a data processor in the GDPR world
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
02:07:20
Thank you steve very informative
Mark Svancarek (BC) (MSFT)
02:12:22
Very helpful
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
02:17:24
We are not talking about WHOIS data when we are talking about billing. How does it get us farther on Alan?
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
02:18:22
Re Billing, it was never published in the WHOIS which is the real anomoly.
Brian King (IPC)
02:18:54
some ccTLDs publish billing-c, FWIW
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:19:01
Why should billing have ever been published in WHOIS, Alan?
Farzaneh Badii (NCSG)
02:20:47
we are not here to talk about data elements that do not belong to registration data as we defined in phase 1. One is billing.
Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
02:21:10
@Farzaneh, we wisely eliminated biillig contacts during phase 1 since there never was a purpose for it. I mentioned it because this kind of analysis would have shown that if we did it years ago. But we never did it.@Amr, it was never published and was never used by regfistrars. I was pointing out how dumb it was thatwe required registrars to collect it.
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
02:21:10
Would finding out the group members be access or disclosure?
Milton Mueller (NCSG)
02:21:36
LOL definitely disclosure
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:22:09
@Alan G: Got it. Thanks.
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
02:22:18
We actually have -14 minutes remaining
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
02:25:25
Are we still maintaining that the calls are supposed to be 90 minutes?
James Bladel (RrSG)
02:27:20
Stephanie
Janis Karklins (Chair)
02:29:40
@Julf, agenda has not been exhausted yet. 120 min were proposed few meetings ago but striving for 90 min meetings
Brian King (IPC)
02:30:27
Those are important considerations, Stephanie.
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
02:30:30
@Janis, proposed but not agreed on.
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG)
02:31:21
Thanks Steve!
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
02:32:38
+1 James…this was super interesting but unclear to me how it could be used in/with our work
James Bladel (RrSG)
02:36:09
Thanks, Steve.
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
02:36:13
Thank you Steve
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
02:37:01
I'll be in transit to Marrakech on the 20th.
Marc Anderson (RySG)
02:37:04
I'm fine to meet on the 20th
Alan Woods (RySG)
02:37:16
two of us so! lol
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
02:37:19
tjhat is a holiday here, I am travelling
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP)
02:37:23
I cannot do the 20th
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
02:37:24
20 June
Marc Anderson (RySG)
02:37:34
but if a large number are traveling, need to take that into account
Volker Greimann (RrSG)
02:37:37
I will be travelling
Terri Agnew
02:38:09
Reminder to complete the alt form if unable to join and alternate should join
Matt Serlin (RrSG)
02:40:01
Thanks all…safe travels to those going before the next meeting
Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC)
02:40:04
Thank you all
Julf Helsingius (NCSG)
02:40:08
Thank you everybody!
Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
02:40:15
Thanks all. Bye.