+1 to Wolfgang's analysis but...

to the extent privacy is a basic human right should it not be considered
inalienable?




> Yes, you are right, at the end we could see the emergence of a mixed
> system which invites registrants and Internet users to go to the ISP,
> Registrars, Search Engine etc. which meets best his/her expectations. This
> was one reason why US based Registrars opposed it rather strongly. They
> feared that Euripean registrars will get a competetive advantage.
>
> What I see in the future (also taking into account the follow up of the
> PRISM/FISA discussion) is that privacy becomes a new business feature which
> will have certainly consequences for competition. In the 1980s, ecology and
> economy were seen as contradictons. Ecology is too expensive and untermines
> the economy, was the position of many companies and governments. Today
> ecology is seen as a business opportunity. We could have a similar
> development in the discussion around privacy. Privacy could become a
> business opportunity. Thatswhy it is important that ICANN offers some
> flexibility in the new RA & RAAs not to block future developments.
>
> best
>
> wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: NCSG-Discuss im Auftrag von marie-laure Lemineur
> Gesendet: So 07.07.2013 05:18
> An: [log in to unmask]
> Betreff: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Article 29 Working Group says EU Registrars
> exempt from data retention in new RAA
>
>
> Hello,
>
> The EU´s GAC  rep stated to the ICANN Board that Article 29 WP is only a
> independent advisory body ! Referring to the letter, he said "this is not a
> EU position as such but the position of an Advisory Committee"...true  but
> still, considering that this particular advisory body gathers
> representatives of the European Commission, of the EU Data Protection
> Supervisor, and of all national Data Protection Authorities in Europe, they
> represent the authoritative expert voices of the EU on the
> subject....surely their statement should have some value and should weight
> in the debate....
>
> In addition to the letter of Article 29 WP,  the independent Advocate
> General of the European Court of Justice recently (25 June 2013) issued a
> legal opinion (not binding on the EU Court of Justice) that the EU Data
> Protection Directive applies to search engines that contain data of EU
> citizens even if the servers are located physically outside the EU.
>
> If we read this opinion bearing in mind the latest letter from Article 29
> Working Party to ICANN CEO, it looks like at some point we might  end up
> with a system where there will be a two- tier RAA when it comes to
> registrars' contractual  obligations related to data retention of
> individual registrants.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Marie-laure
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Rafik Dammak <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>
>         Hi Dave,
>
>         indeed and maybe worthy to reach the European Commission GAC
> representatives and ask them what they think now.
>
>         Best,
>
>         Rafik
>
>
>         2013/7/5 David Cake <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> http://www.internetnews.me/2013/07/04/article-29-working-party-to-icann-eu-registrars-exempt-from-data-retention-requirements/
>                 The totally predictable outcome of the over reach on data
> retention and validation etc in the new RAA is that EU registrars will end
> up being exempt due to the requirements being unlawful.
>                 Which is pretty much what everyone has been telling ICANN
> since this started, and renders the entire process fairly ridiculous.
>
>                 Cheers
>
>                 David
>