30 September 2014
- Mary Wong
- Aleksey Khapchenko
The next Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 30 September 2014 at 1400 UTC 07:00 PDT, 10:00 EDT, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/pnba8ev
Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/ppsai/
Proposed Agenda:
- Roll Call/Updates to SOI
- Update on LA F2F meeting
- Continue deliberations on Category F
- Next steps
Documents for Review:
PPSAI F2F WG Meeting in Los Angeles - draft outline - 30 Sept 2014
Compilation of Provider Answers to WG Questions - 24 September 2014
Draft Prelim Conclusions for Cat F - updated 30 Sept 2014
MP3 Recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140930-en.mp3
Meeting Transcript: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-ppsa-30sep14-en.pdf
Attendees:
Steve Metalitz - IPC
Graeme Bunton – RrSG
Griffin Barnett – IPC
Frank Michlick – Individual
Don Blumenthal – RySG
David Heasley-IPC
Jim Bikoff-IPC
Chris Pelling – RrSG
Kathy Kleiman – NCSG
Darcy Southwell – RrSG
Sarah Wyld – RrSG
Victoria Scheckler - IPC
James Bladel – RrSG
Val Sherman – IPC
Todd Williams – IPC
Keith Kupferschmid-IPC
Amr Elsadr-NCUC
Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP
Tatiana Khramtsova - RrSG
Phil Corwin-BC
Kristina Rosette – IPC
Phil Marano – IPC
Kiran Malancharuvil-IPC
Theo Geurts – RrSG
Susan Kawaguchi – BC
David Hughes – IPC
Justin Macy – BC
Stephanie Perrin – NCSG
Paul McGrady - IPC
Sean McInerney – no SOI
David Cake-NCSG
Libby Baney-BC
Michael Palage - RySG
Alex Deacon – IPC
Lindsay Hamilton-Reid – RrSG
Apologies:
Susan Prosser – RrSG
Michele Neylon – RrSG
Luc Seufer – RrSG
Christian Dawson – ISPCP
Carlton Samuels – At-Large
Holly Raiche – ALAC
ICANN staff:
Mary Wong
Marika Konings
Amy Bivins
Nathalie Peregrine
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 30 September 2014:
Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome to the PPSAI WG meeting of 30 September 2014!
Chris Pelling:afternoon all
Theo Geurts:afternoon Chris
Graeme Bunton:Hello all
Darcy Southwell:Hello!
Osvaldo Novoa:Hello all!
vicky sheckler:hi
Don Blumenthal:Be there is a minute. Phone issues again.
Paul McGrady:Good morning everyone.
Val Sherman:Good morning all
Don Blumenthal:I can hear through the PC. Whjy not start the recording and do roll call.
Nathalie Peregrine:Don, the operator is dialing out to you shortly
Kristina Rosette:Apologies for being late.
Don Blumenthal:I'm on the line.
Nathalie Peregrine:Amr Eslsadr has joined the call
Mary Wong:We've tried to clarify in this updated document that the idea wasn't to not allow phones, but to minimize phone use (ie doesn't mean you can't receive messages, just asking that if you do to please step outside for that brief moment)
Kristina Rosette:Thanks, Don.
Kathy:Don
Kathy:oops - don't we have until Friday?
Kristina Rosette:For those of us who will have to leave at 3 (Michele & me, perhaps others) for the SO/AC leaders meeting, will we have a later opportunity to provide input on the topics discussed from 3 PM on at the F2F?
Kristina Rosette:I'll take my answer off line, later.
Kristina Rosette:thanks.
Marika Konings:@Kristina - as not everyone will be able to participate in the meeting, whether it is in person or remote, the idea has always been that any conclusions would always go back to the list for any comments / suggestions from those that were not able to attend.
Kristina Rosette:super, thanks, Marika
Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the call
Kathy:@Mary, can you put that time/date into chart?
Kathy:chat
Mary Wong:Wednesday 15 October, 8.15-9.45 a.m.
Kristina Rosette:@Mary & Marika: I'll miss whatever part of that Wednesday session conflicts with the GAC session on geonames.
Mary Wong:@Kristina, thanks - we've been trying to minimize conflicts but that's getting harder and harder!
Kristina Rosette:@Mary: understood (and agreed)
Nathalie Peregrine:Kiran Malancharuvil has joined the call
Kathy:@Mary: can we add "inquiry into freedom of expression+ concerns" to Notes? Tx!
Chris Pelling:can the dics be released please so I can move it now I have made it alrger ?
Chris Pelling:docs*
Mary Wong:@Chris, the doc is unsync'ed so you should be able to move it up and down and enlarge with the + button.
Chris Pelling:@Mary, up and down yes, not left to right
Chris Pelling:The Hand (PAN) isnt working here
Marika Konings:Chris, do note that the document is only one page
Chris Pelling:@Mariika, unless it is a single coloum I cant see it
Chris Pelling:http://gyazo.com/f17169baacc6ac3c0a4308c3a4137fd0
Chris Pelling:thats what I see
Chris Pelling:sorryu for the white on black
Kristina Rosette:um, well, if they don't respond, we don't see anything. seriously.
Paul McGrady:Those stats are hard to come by because if they don't respond we don't know why they don't respond.
Graeme Bunton:knowing how many have no response is still useful
Marika Konings:@Chris - not sure what is going on but we are getting you the link so you can download the document.
Chris Pelling:aha - perfect
Graeme Bunton:we need to understand the volume of the issue from the requestor side as well
Marika Konings:@Chris - please try if this works: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/download/attachments/114295448/Cat%20F%20Questions%20at%20a%20Glance%20PDF.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1412087616515&api=v2
Kathy:Oh good, not immediately!
Chris Pelling:bingo Marika :) :)
steve metalitz:@Graeme, why? What would that tell you if you knew how many requests entity X sends to all providers?
Amr Elsadr:I wonder if there is any legislation that may influence a p/p provider's ability to reveal customer data to a 3rd party or even LE. Do we need data on this as well?
Bladel:@Steve: If there is an absence of data, that is still useful. WE would better understand where the "holes" are.
Chris Pelling:To be honest Steve I think it would be good to receive some stats from the requestors side so we can see how big a problem this is from your side
Kathy:@Stephanie, Amr and All, can we ask Staff to look into how disclosures to third parties are handled under some data protection laws?
Kristina Rosette:I don't mean this to sound snarky, but I, for one, wouldn't be spending 3 hours a week on this WG, if the issue wasn't considered a problem.
Keith Kupferschmid:There are many more trademark and copyright owners than p/p services. thus, any information we would get from the IP owner side whiel somewhat helpfuil would be less helpful thaninfo we could get from the p/p services.
Kathy:It's in scope
Kristina Rosette:I have a different question: I seem to recall that a call or 2 ago, several of the providers expressed surprise (or I took it that way) that there are providers not affiliated with registrars. Has the RrSG been tracking any data?
Stephanie Perrin:As a followup to my comments, it would be useful if p/P providers have had complaints to data commissioners after a reveal/disclosure/publication, if they could share the results of the investigations....
Chris Pelling:I doubt it @Kristina, but, I am certainly not the person to ask re rrsg keeping stats etc
Bladel:If they aren't affilated, how would the RrSG be able to track data?
Bladel:Honestly, the only unaffilated services we encounter are the folks who "spoof" these services by copying WHOIS data.
Kristina Rosette:@James: That's my point. If most are affiliated with registrars (which was my takeaway from that conversation), I was wondering if the RrSG had tracked any data or put out a request for it.
Kathy:@Kristina, do you think we could get data from the IPC/BC about requests for Reveal and Relay?
Kathy:Such data would be very valuable to better understand what is happening
Kristina Rosette:@Kathy: We can certainly get the word out.
Kristina Rosette:Speaking only for IPC, of course.
Kathy:@Kristina, tx you!
Bladel:Maybe...sounds like two major consumers of these mechanisms prefer "Relay"
Kathy:@Don, I have the same sense --- that Reveal may not now be as important as Relay
Kathy:I can't hear Vicky :-(
Susan Kawaguchii:No we should be discussing a standard reveal process
Susan Kawaguchii:but we should not be doing so thinking it may result in wholesal release of a registrants contact information
Kristina Rosette:@Susan: +1 (as to standard reveal)
Kiran Malancharuvil:James, I wouldn't say we "prefer" relay insofar as that might be interpreted as us saying we don't value good policy on reveal. we are just saying that we historically use relay because that's the most appropriate way to deal with the kind of requests we make.
Kiran Malancharuvil:+1 to Susan
Val Sherman:+1 Susan and Vicky -- we should discuss what a standard reveal process should look like
Bladel:More data is never a bad thing, even if it is acknowledged to be incomplete.
Keith Kupferschmid:Agree with Val and Vicki, we need to continue our discussion of what a standard reveal process would look like. Yes, we need data but I think we can continue the discussion while we collect this data.
Graeme Bunton:a few hands left up i think
Bladel:I'm sorry, I have to drop. Thanks all.
Chris Pelling:I am sorry to sound blunt, but the type of data being requested is NOT easy to simply pull out
Paul McGrady:Sorry for keeping my hand up!
Chris Pelling:I am probably lucky, I can count on one hand how many we have had
Graeme Bunton:Thanks Paul
Chris Pelling:BUT some providers cant
Mary Wong:@kathy, right - I'm just suggesting that for Publication the group may be closer than we'd thought. But we may still need to discuss Disclosure
Kathy:@Mary - takedown too!
Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye.
Kathy:It's an option we have discussed a lot
Theo Geurts:thanks all
Darcy Southwell:Thanks, bye.