FINAL VERSION SUBMITTED (IF RATIFIED)
The final version to be submitted, if the draft is ratified, will be placed here by upon completion of the vote.
FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC
The final draft version to be voted upon by the ALAC will be placed here before the vote is to begin.
DRAFT SUBMITTED FOR DISCUSSION
The first draft submitted will be placed here before the call for comments begins. The Draft should be preceded by the name of the person submitting the draft and the date/time. If, during the discussion, the draft is revised, the older version(S) should be left in place and the new version along with a header line identifying the drafter and date/time should be placed above the older version(s), separated by a Horizontal Rule (available + Insert More Content control).
Hadia ElMiniawi 7 July 2021 at 15:25 UTC
AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on
The System for Standardized Access/disclosure to non-public domain name registration information
(“SSAD”)
The ALAC notes with appreciation the hard work of the EPDP Phase two team work which resulted in producing an initial report outlining a proposed system for standardized access/disclosure to non-public gTLD registration data (“SSAD”) accompanied by 18 recommendations and an addendum to the initial report addressing priority two items accompanied by four recommendations and two conclusions.
While ALAC acknowledges that the phase two team was successful in arriving at consensus in relation to many of phase two recommendations and as we ensure our full commitment to ICANN processes and multi-stakeholder model, we find ourselves obliged to present this advice to the ICANN Board of Directors to safeguard the interests of individual Internet end users.
Our advice to the Board relates to four main aspects of the initial report outlining the proposed system for access/disclosure to nonpublic registration data
1.The ability of the proposed system (“SSAD”) to fulfil the requirements of the system’s users (Nonpublic information requestors)
The SSAD was initially created in order to allow third parties with legitimate interests and lawful basis to obtain nonpublic registration data that would fulfil their purposes for requesting the information. Many of these legitimate interests and purposes for the use of the SSAD are related to the protection of Internet end users; as such, ALAC would like to see the proposed system fulfilling the needs of its users. However, the service level agreements associated with the requests types and the assigned priorities make it impossible for the SSAD to fulfill the needs of urgent requests as well as requests related to consumers’ protection among others.
2. The Proposed system in most cases offers a service that does not differ much than the current practice
While the system automates the receipt, authentication and transmission of SSAD requests to the relevant contracted party, all disclosure decisions apart from four limited use cases are handled in a manner that does not differ much than the current practices. Providing limited benefit to its intended users.
3. The agility of the system and its ability to adapt and evolve
Given the novelty of the proposed solution and possible legal clarity as time passes and more cases are globally addressed, SSAD is expected to be able to adapt and evolve based on new findings and learned experiences. However, the proposed recommendations do not allow for an agile system that could evolve without further EPDPs.
4. The consensus level that some of the recommendations received
Six out of the 18 recommendations received significant opposition. These six recommendations address the response requirements, contracted party authorization, automation of the SSAD, service level agreements related to non-automated discloser requests, discloser requirements, review of implementation using a GNSO standing committee and the ability of the system to adapt and evolve. All of the recommendations lacking consensus are core recommendations to the operation of the proposed system for access/disclosure, which indicates lack of community support to the proposed model. Ultimately, resulting in developing a system whose intended beneficiaries will not use.
As the implementation of the proposed system will entail significant costs, time and effort, and as there is no clear evidence that the proposed system offers a service which differs much than the current practice. The ALAC advices the board not to implement the proposed SSAD and advise towards further work to achieve a solution that would serve the public interest.
