Re: [council] Draft PDP charter - Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation PDP WG

[Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Mary and colleagues,

As I said on the Council call, I'm concerned about the framing of the
questions in the draft charter: I'd like every "What" to say "What, if
any ..." rather than suggesting that all of them necessarily require
practices or responses. I also believe the number of questions is far
too large, giving the group an unwieldy broad scope (indeed, when I
first viewed and printed the document from OpenOffice, the list was cut
off after 6).

--Wendy

On 10/17/2013 03:17 PM, Mary Wong wrote:
> Dear all, attached is a revised version of the draft charter, to which I've
> added Volker's suggested questions (below) to the scope of the WG's work and
> fixed the previous typos. I hope this revised version will be of assistance
> in your continuing discussions.
> 
> Cheers
> Mary
> 
> Mary Wong
> Senior Policy Director
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892
> Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> * One World. One Internet. *
> 
> From:  Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Organization:  Afilias
> Reply-To:  "jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date:  Wednesday, October 16, 2013 5:07 AM
> To:  'Volker Greimann' <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject:  RE: [council] Draft PDP charter - Privacy & Proxy Accreditation
> Services PDP WG
> 
>> Thanks Volker,
>>  
>> Agreed on the title.  I think the Privacy & Proxy Accreditation Services PDP
>> WG is a typo/error and it should read Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation
>> PDP WG.
>> Thanks also for the specific additional input of your two points italicised
>> below.
>>  
>> I¹d very much like to get additional input on whether or not we (or with the
>> help of input from our respective groups / constituencies) can get the 
>> current
>> draft charter polished to a satisfactory state.
>>  
>> There is obviously a driver to getting the WG going without the DT step  i.e.
>> to demonstrate that the PDP process can be efficient and, to some extent,
>> flexible whilst still being thorough.
>> But, clearly we need to be sure that we are confident that we can tolerate
>> skipping this (DT) step if we go down that route.
>>  
>> Jonathan
>>  
>>
>> From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: 15 October 2013 18:15
>> To: jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [council] Draft PDP charter - Privacy & Proxy Accreditation
>> Services PDP WG
>>  
>>
>> Hi Jonathan, 
>>
>> first of all, I support the new naming of the proposed PDP to better fit and
>> describe the only identified remaining issues. By giving the PDP WG a name
>> that says what is does, it will be easier to attract the necessary parties to
>> participate in this important effort and add focus the work effort. Maybe 
>> just
>> one suggestion would be to switch the positions of the words "Accreditation"
>> and "Services" to make it read: "Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation PDP
>> WG", i.e. the way it is spelled out in text of the draft charter, but not in
>> the headline.
>>
>> Regarding the charter, I feel that the draft is already a good template for
>> the WG. While it may be advisable to give it a final polish in a Drafting
>> Team, I can see why there is support for option one. I would however suggest 
>> a
>> few further issues to consider:
>>
>> "What are the effects of the privacy & proxy service specification contained
>> in the 2013 RAA? Have these new requirements improved Whois quality,
>> registrant contactability and service usability?"
>>
>> "What should be the contractual obligations of ICANN accredited registrars
>> with regard to accredited privacy/proxy service providers? Should registrars
>> be permitted to knowingly accept registrations where the registrant is using
>> unaccredited service providers that are however bound to the same standards 
>> as
>> accredited service providers?"
>>
>> etc.
>>     
>> So I am not yet certain this draft is or should be the final word. While the
>> remaining changes to this draft may be minor, it maybe worthwhile to go
>> through the entire process by creating a drafting team, if just to make sure
>> all the "i"s are dotted.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Volker
>>> All,
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Following up on our discussion regarding the charter for the ³RAA Remaining
>>> Issues PDP² on our call on Thursday last week, I hope that we can start a
>>> discussion right away regarding possible revisions to the draft charter
>>> prepared by staff which I forwarded to you all just prior to our meeting.  I
>>> believe our aim should be to form a view as to whether or not the draft
>>> charter, as amended according to our anticipated discussions, is a document
>>> that can be voted on for adoption at our next Council meeting.
>>>  
>>> As a reminder, our options are essentially either:
>>>  
>>> 1.      Discuss and revise this draft charter for formal adoption by the
>>> Council, which will then proceed to form a Working Group (WG) to begin work;
>>> or 
>>>
>>> 2.      Create a Drafting Team (DT) to finalize a charter ­ based either 
>>> upon
>>> this draft or starting from a blank slate ­ to be proposed for adoption at a
>>> later Council meeting.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> On our Thursday call last week, several Councillors supported option 1 above
>>> as a pragmatic way forward i.e. to see if we can find agreement as to the
>>> terms of the charter that will govern the WG's work. I am therefore
>>> circulating the draft Charter again (re-titled and slightly revised to more
>>> accurately reflect the scope of the PDP) for discussion.
>>>  
>>> My sense is that the scope will be largely governed by the specific issues
>>> that are laid out in Section III of the draft Charter.  So, perhaps we can
>>> start by discussing possible revisions to these questions, not in terms of
>>> substantive discussion over the merits or content of the answers, but in
>>> relation to whether they sufficiently describe and frame the scope of work
>>> for the WG.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> If we are able to reach agreement within the next week, we can then propose
>>> the revised charter for adoption on 21 October i.e. within the document
>>> deadline for our upcoming 31 October meeting.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> I look forward to an engaging and constructive discussion on the list on 
>>> this
>>> topic.
>>>  
>>> Thanks,
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>>  
>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>>  
>> Volker A. Greimann
>> - Rechtsabteilung -
>>  
>> Key-Systems GmbH
>> Im Oberen Werk 1
>> 66386 St. Ingbert
>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>> Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>  
>> Web: www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net>  / www.RRPproxy.net
>> <http://www.RRPproxy.net>
>> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com>  /
>> www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com>
>>  
>> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
>> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
>>  
>> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
>> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
>> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>>  
>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>> www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu>
>>  
>> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen
>> Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder
>> Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese
>> Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per
>> E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>>  
>> --------------------------------------------
>>  
>> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>>  
>> Best regards,
>>  
>> Volker A. Greimann
>> - legal department -
>>  
>> Key-Systems GmbH
>> Im Oberen Werk 1
>> 66386 St. Ingbert
>> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>> Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>  
>> Web: www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net>  / www.RRPproxy.net
>> <http://www.RRPproxy.net>
>> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com>  /
>> www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com>
>>  
>> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
>> www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
>> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
>>  
>> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
>> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
>> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>>  
>> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>> www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu>
>>  
>> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is
>> addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this
>> email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an
>> addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify
>> the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>>  
>>  
>>  
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx +1 617.863.0613
Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
http://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/