The next Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 18th February 2014 at 1500 UTC (07:00 PST, 10:00 EST, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET).
Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/ppsai/
Agenda:
- Roll Call / SOI Update
- WG Discussion of Category A, Question 2 (as reflected in approved Groupings of the Charter Questions document)
- Findings of Whois studies re prevalence of proxy and privacy services
- Discussion of Cat. A, Q.2
- Planning for Singapore
- Confirm next steps / next meeting
Documents for Review:
PPSAI Draft Work Plan v2 - 14 February 2014
PPSAI - Cat I - Question 2.doc
PPSAI Charter Questions Grouping - 13 Feb 2014
MP3 Recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140218-en.mp3
Meeting Transcript :http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-ppsa-18feb14-en.pdf
Attendees:
Luc Seufer - RrSG
Volker Greimann - RrSG
Maria Farrell – NCUC
Graeme Bunton – RrSG
Tim Ruiz – RrSG
Sarah Wyld – no SOI as of yet
David Heasley - IPC
James Bladel - RrSG
Steve Metalitz - IPC
Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP
Valeriya Sherman – IPC
Kathy Kleiman – RySGgr
Justin Macey - BC
Darcy Southwell - RrSG
Carlton Samuels – ALAC
Alex Deacon - IPC
Ben Anderson – RrSG
Todd Williams – IPC
Don Moody - IPC
Theo Geurts - RrSG
Susan Prosser - RrSG
Don Blumenthal - RySG
Libby Baney - BC
Michael Shoukry - BC
Phil Marano – IPC
Jim Bikoff – IPC
Tatiana Khramstova - RrSG
Griffin Barnett - IPC
Apologies:
Amr Elsadr - NCUC
Tobias Sattler - RrSG
Holly Raiche - ALAC
Paul McGrady - IPC
Gema Campillos - GAC
Roy Balleste – NCUC
ICANN staff:
Marika Konings
Mary Wong
Margie Milam
Amy Bivins
Mike Zupke
Joe Catapano
Terri Agnew
Nathalie Peregrine
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 18 February 2014:
Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the PPSAI WG call on February 18th 2014 at 1500 UTC
Graeme Bunton:g'morning all
Theo Geurts:gáfternoon ;)
Maria Farrell 2:hi all
Val Sherman:Griffin Barnett is also on call
Mary Wong:We will announce more people joining the call in Adobe chat.
Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Barnett has joined the call
Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Baney, apologies
Nathalie Peregrine:Don Moody and Carlton Samuels are also inn the AC room
Carlton Samuels:Hi everybody
Nathalie Peregrine:Susan Prosser is on the audio bridge
Don Moody:Greetings
Nathalie Peregrine:Tim Ruiz has joined the Ac room
Nathalie Peregrine:Justin macy has joined the AC room
Nathalie Peregrine:Osvaldo Novoa has joined the call
Osvaldo Novoa:Hi everyone
Terri Agnew:carlton samuels has joined the AC room
steve metalitz:Template looks good to me, thanks staff.
Don Blumenthal:Agreed
Carlton Samuels:Not sure what happened but enabling audio seem to lose me audio, go figure. Can only restore by restarting
Nathalie Peregrine:@ Carlton, we can dial out to you if you prefer
Nathalie Peregrine:Michael Shoukry has joined the AC room
Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the AC room
Carlton Samuels:@Nathalie: No worry. If I need to say something I will make a specific request on chat
Volker Greimann:how big was the sample and how were domain names selected for the study?
Maria Farrell 2:there's quite an echo on steve's line
Bladel:@maria: I don't hear it...maybe just on your line?
Maria Farrell 2:oh, maybe so. I'm on the adobe connect.
Maria Farrell 2:it's gone now in any case
Tim Ruiz:Which of questions does Staff propose that this study helps to inform us?
Maria Farrell 2:I'd support hearing about the misuse of whois, as long as we keep on track, time wise.
Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: +1 to the CM Study. That would be much more useful to this part of the conversation
Tim Ruiz:Did the full report give actual percentages instead of just "significant?" And does it compare that with the percentages of the universe of all domains as a whole?
steve metalitz:Mary, the Whois Registrant ID study is the one that has teherelevant information.
Tim Ruiz:The CMU study gets to why users may choose to use P/P services.
Kathy Kleiman:Mary: I think the Misue of Whois Data study findings will be very useful to our work...
Libby Baney:regarding the cited surveys and studies, could Staff send around links to each so WG members may read if desired?
Carlton Samuels:@James: I agree that conserving the terms and condition of the RAA aso far as required. P/P Services are exit loops for alternate processing that must rejoin the main process to be useful. Hence the need for accreditation, the key requirement being a trust relationship
Don Blumenthal:Links are on the wiki page
Bladel:But that could change with market condidtions. Or if a large player (e.g. DomainsByProxy) changed its service model.
Luc Seufer:How does one distinguish between a proxy and a privacy registration?
Luc Seufer:(if you are netither the registrant nor the p/p provider)
Carlton Samuels:@Luc: Apparently the steps in the "reveal " process
Volker Greimann:privacy: hides some details but not others:
Volker Greimann:proxy: hides all details
Don Blumenthal:We can hear you Volker
Volker Greimann:bloddy heck
Tim Ruiz:Did we ask for a review of this study? Could we hold off on any more of these types of reviews until the WG decides what it needs to review and inform its work?
Carlton Samuels:@Volker: To me its like po-tato and po-taa-to. Its the resulyts that matter. So for me, all that is a black box. I'm prepared to accept all so long as 1. The provider is accredited. 2. The provider accepts strict liability. All the details can be determined by the business moidel the provider adopts.
Nathalie Peregrine:David Heasley is on the audio bridge
Tim Ruiz:I think Privacy Services are harder to identify and usage is likely higher than any study has noted.
Volker Greimann:agreed
Carlton Samuels:I'm actually running a seminar so I'm back and forth...going forth now
Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, do you think there is an issue/question of trying to figure out and find Privacy Service providers?
Maria Farrell 2:Apart from the difference in the 'Reveal' side, is there any difference in how the two services are marketed? i.e. are proxy services sold as means to protect privacy, but we (ICANN) classify them as proxy services?
Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, cont: are they (privacy service providers) likely to be more informal?
Volker Greimann:ok, sounds good
Tim Ruiz:@Kathy, they often use the actual beneficial user's name as the registrant but use other info for address, email, phone, etc. And even that info may be somewhat different for each name registered.
Maria Farrell 2:that would be great, thanks Mary
Volker Greimann:also: what is a "significant percentage"? 1%? 5%? 10? More?
Volker Greimann:apologies, old hand
Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, tx!
Mary Wong:@Tim, staff was requested to present a short summary of the relevant Whois studies; based on comments on the charter questions it seemed that this particular study - despite its ultimate findiings - was of interest to the WG. Apologies that the prevalance question was not directly answered - as mentioned we will pull out the various studies and try to give a more prcecise report on the list.
Don Blumenthal:Hmm. I'm not on mute
Don Blumenthal:That's what was saying.
steve metalitz 2:Of the 320 domain registrants coded as Privacy/Proxy service providers, only 10 were determined to beprivacy service providers. In other words, about 3 percent of domain registrants using a privacy or proxyservice used a privacy service
steve metalitz 2:Source: http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/registrant-identification-summary-06feb13-en.pdf That was the draft report (on which cmments were filed) but the firgues might have changed in final?
Tim Ruiz:@Steve, what was the methodology used? It can be very difficult to identify Privacy Service domains.
Kathy Kleiman:Can we wait until there is more feedback??
Kathy Kleiman:I don't see a diversity of sources at this time.
Mary Wong:@Steve, the final report states 20 privacy service providers out of 320.
Mary Wong:The main figure, though, is that 6% of registrants using either Privacy pr Proxy services used a privacy service.
Mary Wong:The dataset was based on a random sampling of 1600 domains across the top 5 gTLDs (with some adjustment for the .info and .biz domains)
Graeme Bunton:only 1600!
Mary Wong:Yes - that may be something for the WG to bear in mind.
Mary Wong:@Graeme I'm happy to explain why we ended up at 1600 (has to do with earlier studies)
Marika Konings:Also note that in certain cases comments may need to be redirected to other templates if deemed not specific to the question at hand
Tim Ruiz:Perhaps we proceed with the concept that it is one accreditation for P/P providers. When we address something that should clearly warrant distinguishing a difference between them, we do. What I don't want to do is to just ignore the fact that Privacy type services exist.
Nathalie Peregrine:Roy Balleste sends his apology for today's call
Justin Macy:Sure I can talk about it.
Justin Macy:Please give me a moment to cal in the audio bridg
Don Blumenthal:Justin, jump in when you are on and someone has finished speaking.
Kathy Kleiman:It seems to be me that privacy and proxy services are different. If anything, privacy services provide MORE information and therefore should probably have fewer obligations
Maria Farrell 2:it may be taking justin some time to get on. I just did and was on hold for 3 mins
Nathalie Peregrine:Justin ois not on the bridge yet
steve metalitz 2:+1 @ Tim
Tim Ruiz:In other words, this question will answer itself as we go.
Marika Konings:Please send any proposed additions to the mailing list and specify to which charter question or sub-queston these relate so we can include it in the right palce.
Val Sherman:+1 @Tim
Bladel:Sorry, need to drop the call. Thanks everyone.
Marika Konings:also, please include a link to your source so we can add that as well
Justin Macy:Could we resend out the link for the Survey, for those who have not yet responded?
steve metalitz 2:Perhaps add a question at the end of all future templates -- should the same standard apply to proxy srvices and privacy services?
Marika Konings:https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/86N33WX
Justin Macy:Thanks!
Tim Ruiz:+1 Steve
Maria Farrell 2:+1 steve, thanks
Marika Konings:@Steve - noted. I'll add this to the next iteration.
Kathy Kleiman:Good question, Steve -- with a "and why" added to the question
Val Sherman:+1 @Steve and Kathy
Maria Farrell 2:great call. thanks everyone.
Tim Ruiz:Thx Don
Graeme Bunton:thanks don
Volker Greimann:prtfrct don
Michael Shoukry:thanks everyone
Phil Marano:Thanks everyone!
Kathy Kleiman:Bye All!
Luc Seufer:thank you Don
Alex Deacon:bye!
Theo Geurts:gáfternoon ;)
Maria Farrell 2:hi all
Val Sherman:Griffin Barnett is also on call
Mary Wong:We will announce more people joining the call in Adobe chat.
Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Barnett has joined the call
Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Baney, apologies
Nathalie Peregrine:Don Moody and Carlton Samuels are also inn the AC room
Carlton Samuels:Hi everybody
Nathalie Peregrine:Susan Prosser is on the audio bridge
Don Moody:Greetings
Nathalie Peregrine:Tim Ruiz has joined the Ac room
Nathalie Peregrine:Justin macy has joined the AC room
Nathalie Peregrine:Osvaldo Novoa has joined the call
Osvaldo Novoa:Hi everyone
Terri Agnew:carlton samuels has joined the AC room
steve metalitz:Template looks good to me, thanks staff.
Don Blumenthal:Agreed
Carlton Samuels:Not sure what happened but enabling audio seem to lose me audio, go figure. Can only restore by restarting
Nathalie Peregrine:@ Carlton, we can dial out to you if you prefer
Nathalie Peregrine:Michael Shoukry has joined the AC room
Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the AC room
Carlton Samuels:@Nathalie: No worry. If I need to say something I will make a specific request on chat
Volker Greimann:how big was the sample and how were domain names selected for the study?
Maria Farrell 2:there's quite an echo on steve's line
Bladel:@maria: I don't hear it...maybe just on your line?
Maria Farrell 2:oh, maybe so. I'm on the adobe connect.
Maria Farrell 2:it's gone now in any case
Tim Ruiz:Which of questions does Staff propose that this study helps to inform us?
Maria Farrell 2:I'd support hearing about the misuse of whois, as long as we keep on track, time wise.
Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: +1 to the CM Study. That would be much more useful to this part of the conversation
Tim Ruiz:Did the full report give actual percentages instead of just "significant?" And does it compare that with the percentages of the universe of all domains as a whole?
steve metalitz:Mary, the Whois Registrant ID study is the one that has teherelevant information.
Tim Ruiz:The CMU study gets to why users may choose to use P/P services.
Kathy Kleiman:Mary: I think the Misue of Whois Data study findings will be very useful to our work...
Libby Baney:regarding the cited surveys and studies, could Staff send around links to each so WG members may read if desired?
Carlton Samuels:@James: I agree that conserving the terms and condition of the RAA aso far as required. P/P Services are exit loops for alternate processing that must rejoin the main process to be useful. Hence the need for accreditation, the key requirement being a trust relationship
Don Blumenthal:Links are on the wiki page
Bladel:But that could change with market condidtions. Or if a large player (e.g. DomainsByProxy) changed its service model.
Luc Seufer:How does one distinguish between a proxy and a privacy registration?
Luc Seufer:(if you are netither the registrant nor the p/p provider)
Carlton Samuels:@Luc: Apparently the steps in the "reveal " process
Volker Greimann:privacy: hides some details but not others:
Volker Greimann:proxy: hides all details
Don Blumenthal:We can hear you Volker
Volker Greimann:bloddy heck
Tim Ruiz:Did we ask for a review of this study? Could we hold off on any more of these types of reviews until the WG decides what it needs to review and inform its work?
Carlton Samuels:@Volker: To me its like po-tato and po-taa-to. Its the resulyts that matter. So for me, all that is a black box. I'm prepared to accept all so long as 1. The provider is accredited. 2. The provider accepts strict liability. All the details can be determined by the business moidel the provider adopts.
Nathalie Peregrine:David Heasley is on the audio bridge
Tim Ruiz:I think Privacy Services are harder to identify and usage is likely higher than any study has noted.
Volker Greimann:agreed
Carlton Samuels:I'm actually running a seminar so I'm back and forth...going forth now
Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, do you think there is an issue/question of trying to figure out and find Privacy Service providers?
Maria Farrell 2:Apart from the difference in the 'Reveal' side, is there any difference in how the two services are marketed? i.e. are proxy services sold as means to protect privacy, but we (ICANN) classify them as proxy services?
Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, cont: are they (privacy service providers) likely to be more informal?
Volker Greimann:ok, sounds good
Tim Ruiz:@Kathy, they often use the actual beneficial user's name as the registrant but use other info for address, email, phone, etc. And even that info may be somewhat different for each name registered.
Maria Farrell 2:that would be great, thanks Mary
Volker Greimann:also: what is a "significant percentage"? 1%? 5%? 10? More?
Volker Greimann:apologies, old hand
Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, tx!
Mary Wong:@Tim, staff was requested to present a short summary of the relevant Whois studies; based on comments on the charter questions it seemed that this particular study - despite its ultimate findiings - was of interest to the WG. Apologies that the prevalance question was not directly answered - as mentioned we will pull out the various studies and try to give a more prcecise report on the list.
Don Blumenthal:Hmm. I'm not on mute
Don Blumenthal:That's what was saying.
steve metalitz 2:Of the 320 domain registrants coded as Privacy/Proxy service providers, only 10 were determined to beprivacy service providers. In other words, about 3 percent of domain registrants using a privacy or proxyservice used a privacy service
steve metalitz 2:Source: http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/registrant-identification-summary-06feb13-en.pdf That was the draft report (on which cmments were filed) but the firgues might have changed in final?
Tim Ruiz:@Steve, what was the methodology used? It can be very difficult to identify Privacy Service domains.
Kathy Kleiman:Can we wait until there is more feedback??
Kathy Kleiman:I don't see a diversity of sources at this time.
Mary Wong:@Steve, the final report states 20 privacy service providers out of 320.
Mary Wong:The main figure, though, is that 6% of registrants using either Privacy pr Proxy services used a privacy service.
Mary Wong:The dataset was based on a random sampling of 1600 domains across the top 5 gTLDs (with some adjustment for the .info and .biz domains)
Graeme Bunton:only 1600!
Mary Wong:Yes - that may be something for the WG to bear in mind.
Mary Wong:@Graeme I'm happy to explain why we ended up at 1600 (has to do with earlier studies)
Marika Konings:Also note that in certain cases comments may need to be redirected to other templates if deemed not specific to the question at hand
Tim Ruiz:Perhaps we proceed with the concept that it is one accreditation for P/P providers. When we address something that should clearly warrant distinguishing a difference between them, we do. What I don't want to do is to just ignore the fact that Privacy type services exist.
Nathalie Peregrine:Roy Balleste sends his apology for today's call
Justin Macy:Sure I can talk about it.
Justin Macy:Please give me a moment to cal in the audio bridg
Don Blumenthal:Justin, jump in when you are on and someone has finished speaking.
Kathy Kleiman:It seems to be me that privacy and proxy services are different. If anything, privacy services provide MORE information and therefore should probably have fewer obligations
Maria Farrell 2:it may be taking justin some time to get on. I just did and was on hold for 3 mins
Nathalie Peregrine:Justin ois not on the bridge yet
steve metalitz 2:+1 @ Tim
Tim Ruiz:In other words, this question will answer itself as we go.
Marika Konings:Please send any proposed additions to the mailing list and specify to which charter question or sub-queston these relate so we can include it in the right palce.
Val Sherman:+1 @Tim
Bladel:Sorry, need to drop the call. Thanks everyone.
Marika Konings:also, please include a link to your source so we can add that as well
Justin Macy:Could we resend out the link for the Survey, for those who have not yet responded?
steve metalitz 2:Perhaps add a question at the end of all future templates -- should the same standard apply to proxy srvices and privacy services?
Marika Konings:https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/86N33WX
Justin Macy:Thanks!
Tim Ruiz:+1 Steve
Maria Farrell 2:+1 steve, thanks
Marika Konings:@Steve - noted. I'll add this to the next iteration.
Kathy Kleiman:Good question, Steve -- with a "and why" added to the question
Val Sherman:+1 @Steve and Kathy
Maria Farrell 2:great call. thanks everyone.
Tim Ruiz:Thx Don
Graeme Bunton:thanks don
Volker Greimann:prtfrct don
Michael Shoukry:thanks everyone
Phil Marano:Thanks everyone!
Kathy Kleiman:Bye All!
Luc Seufer:thank you Don
Alex Deacon:bye!
