Hi all, With enormous thanks to the drafters and re-drafters, shocked and otherwise of this. Hereby the official final call on Stephanie's revised Draft 5; any final comments? This draft closes at 1500 UTC today. All the best, Maria On 1 August 2014 11:04, Stephanie Perrin <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Thanks, Sam! Responses to your comments: > 1) I have discussed this a bit with Avri and I am reluctant to drop the > Snowden reference, even if it is a wee bit inflammatory....this is partly > because I am tired of talking in general terms about public policy, they > will simply interpret that as compliance with law enforcement demands, not > privacy expectations of consumers. > 2) agreed, I am tempted to say that in the comment but resisting > 3) re the typos, I will have to go back, check the quotes, and square > bracket/sic them. thanks! > cheers stephanie > > On 2014-07-31, 13:19, Sam Lanfranco wrote: > > It is late in the time left for revising this document so I will just > offer three short comments without going in and attempting to wordsmith > inside the document. Food for though! > > #1: Page 1: As part of the opening logic to the submission the text as > written is: > > *In the matter of protection of personal and confidential information, > which is a very newsworthy issue in the 21st century, privacy practices are > a matter of consumer trust, and therefore high risk for those operating an > Internet business. Even if customers have obediently complied with demands > for excessive collection and disclosure of personal information up to this > point, in the current news furor over Snowden and the cooperation of > business with national governments engaged in surveillance, this could > change with the next news story. The Internet facilitates successful > privacy campaigns.* > > I would suggest that the submission focus in immediately on ICANN practice > and evolving policy on the protection of personal and confidential > information, and not so much Snowden and news stories. > > [Possible revision] > > *In the matter of protection of personal and confidential information on > the Internet social norms and public policy are evolving and ICANN should > be in the forefront of helping define workable practice, as well as > bringing its contract language in line with public policy. It is bad ICANN > business practice to put registrars at odds with national privacy policy. > It also jeopardizes registrars’ consumer trust and puts at risk the > business of those operating an Internet business. * > > #2: [Comment] There is a saying about the Catholic Church, to the effect > that dealing with social norms it always arrives a little late and out of > breath. ICANN is acting in a similar way. ICANN could both handle this in > contract language, and help evolve best and workable practices around the > protection of personal and confidential information by (a) contract > language that is consistent with national policy, and (b) showing some > leadership in what would be good and workable policy here. ICANN is neither > a King nor a Church bestowing favors on registries and registrars. It is a > business entering into contractual obligations with its direct customers. > > #3: [*Typo*] I don’t know if the typo is in the Blacknight quote or not, > but 5.3 should read …., then [not than] ALL registrars based in Germany…” > > 5.3 Response. The European Commission in its comments wrote, and we > strongly agree: “the same exception should apply to others in the same > jurisdiction who can demonstrate that they are in the same situation.” > Further, Blacknight wrote and we support: “if ANY registrar in Germany, for > example, is granted a waiver based on German law, *then* ALL registrars > based in Germany should receive the same treatment.” Once a national data > protection or privacy law is interpreted as requiring and exemption or > modification, it should be available to all Registries/Registrars in that > country. > > Sam L. > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > [log in to unmask] > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > >