+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 >