Re: [council] Proposed addition to Wednesday Agenda
Same here! Thomas Am 24.03.2014 um 05:25 schrieb Reed, Daniel A <dan-reed@xxxxxxxxx>: > Likewise > > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On > Behalf Of Magaly Pazello > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 11:32 AM > To: Amr Elsadr > Cc: Avri Doria; GNSO Council List > Subject: Re: [council] Proposed addition to Wednesday Agenda > > +1 > > Magaly > > On Sunday, March 23, 2014, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > So do I. I believe this discussion is overdue. Thanks for suggesting it, > > James. > > > > Amr > > > > On Mar 23, 2014, at 8:30 PM, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I support including the discussion item in the agenda. > >> > >> avri > >> > >> On 23-Mar-14 20:26, James M. Bladel wrote: > >>> Councilors: > >>> > >>> As discussed, here is my proposal agenda add (vetted by Maria & Thomas) > >>> for a discussion during Wednesday’s open session. Would be happy to > >>> hear comments/edits. > >>> > >>> Thanks— > >>> > >>> J. > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >>> *Discussion item: Data retention waiver and the apparent conflict of > >>> national data protection laws with the 2013 RAA * > >>> > >>> Many European registrars have expressed frustration with ICANN’s > >>> handling of their waiver requests from the Data Retention requirements > >>> under the 2013 RAA, particularly considering recent statements by > >>> various data protection authorities that these requirements violate > >>> national privacy laws. Other ICANN stakeholders have expressed concern > >>> about the treatment of legal data protection requirements when the ICANN > >>> contract appears to conflict with certain laws. Still other stakeholders > >>> are concerned that the ability of law enforcement and private > >>> enforcement actions to access data be kept in place. The RAA includes > >>> language that allows ICANN to temporarily suspend enforcement of the > >>> data retention provisions. As this situation has now been ongoing for > >>> over six months, pending a resolution of the issue, should the GNSO > >>> Council and larger ICANN Community direct ICANN Staff to suspend > >>> enforcement for any registrar requesting a waiver? > >>> > > > > > > Attachment:
signature.asc
|