Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Info

PROPOSED AGENDA



  1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes)


2. Discussion of communication from Legal Counsel

  • Final Report approach – proposed text for reporting conclusions to full EPDP Team

For the following questions previously posed to legal counsel, draft text is attached for your consideration. The text is designed to explain the legal guidance for the larger EPDP Team (and the ultimate readers of the Final Report). With this in mind, please review the attached text and come to the meeting with an eye toward quickly delivering a document to the plenary.

  • Legal vs. Natural
  • Legal Bases (6(1)(b) vs. 6(1)(f))
  • Technical Contact


3. Discussion of additional questions for Legal Counsel

For the following questions,

  • Redaction of City Field
  • Accuracy under GDPR – how broad is the definition?
  • Establishment under GDPR

4. Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Wednesday, 6 February 2019 at 14.00 UTC

    1. Confirm action items

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS


Additional Questions to Legal Counsel - 28Jan19

LC Meeting Draft Text

Info
titleRECORDINGS

Mp3

Adobe Connect Recording

Tip
titlePARTICIPATION

Attendance & AC chat

Apologies: Tatiana Tropina (NCSG)

Alternates: Amr Elsadr (NCSG)

...

Note

Notes/ Action Items


Action Items

  1. LC to finalize questions to send to Legal Counsel by Friday, 1 Feb. Please refer to the Google Doc for edits.
    1. City Field
    2. Accuracy
    3. Establishment
  2. Kurt to reach out to Bird & Bird to inform them the LC would like to include their summary text within the Final Report.
  3. Support Team to post Bird & Bird memos to wiki. (completed)


 

 

EPDP Legal Committee Meeting Agenda

Wednesday, 30 January 2019 


1.         Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes)

 


2.         Discussion of communication from Legal Counsel

 


Agenda Feedback: 

 


  • Concerned feedback from B&B may not be as thorough as it should be - specifically, not just an RNH self-declares as a legal vs. natural person, but whether if there is an established legal person as a registrant whether that includes publication of PII. Is it possible to get more information something we can do?
  • In the interim, the plenary team has dealt with the legal vs. natural issue - namely, the Team decided to maintain the Temp Spec and discuss this issue later in Phase 2. The response given by B&B seemed to support the Team's conclusion that it is a complicated issue, so while registrars may be able to mitigate liability, there is still liability.
  • If we think we should go back to them with additional questions, that is an option.

 

 



Final Report approach – proposed text for reporting conclusions to full EPDP Team 


For the following questions previously posed to legal counsel, draft text is attached for your consideration. The text is designed to explain the legal guidance for the larger EPDP Team (and the ultimate readers of the Final Report). With this in mind, please review the attached text and come to the meeting with an eye toward quickly delivering a document to the plenary.

 


o          Legal vs. Natural

  • Team to review proposed language to see if it's OK for sharing with the plenary team.
  • "likely be liable" should be changed to "could be subject to liability"
  • Forward the response we received from Bird & Bird in its full form and ask the Team if it needs the summary.
  • How far should we go in summarizing back to the group? The summary appears to leave the Temp Spec as it is.
  • Having the legal advice as a reference would be valuable even outside of this EPDP
  • Given the fact the Team has a lot of work to do, it would be helpful to provide key takeaways from the legal memo.
  • Risk in summarizing legal memo - perhaps would be to ask Bird and Bird to summarize their advice that we could include in the Final Report.
  • We may want to let Bird & Bird know that their summary emails will be included within the text of the Final Report. Let them know so that they can edit it if necessary.

 


o          Legal Bases (6(1)(b) vs. 6(1)(f)) 


o          Technical Contact 


3.         Discussion of additional questions for Legal Counsel 


For the following questions, 

 


•          Redaction of City Field

  • During the last meeting, Thomas noted that everyone agrees city name is personal data, and the important question is - is there a legal basis? Accordingly, the posed question was bifurcated - is the city field personal data, and if so, is there a legal basis to publish?
  • Linkable information could be information that when combined with other information can be used to identify someone. The question should look at this.
  • Take our list of unredacted data in the Final Report, add city field, and then ask if this would be personal data?
  • The meaning of PII and personal data is not far apart in most jx.
  • If there is a legal basis to disclose to a third party, that may be different from publication.
  • What are the risks of publishing or disclosing the city name, state/province, country name of the registered name holder?

 


•          Accuracy under GDPR – how broad is the definition?

 


•          Establishment under GDPR

  • May need to first confirm if counsel believes there are indeed stable establishments.
 


4.         Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Wednesday, 6 February 2019 at 14.00 UTC 


a.         Confirm action items