The next Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 25 August 2015 at 1400 UTC (07:00 PDT, 10:00 EDT, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET).
Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/ppsai/
Proposed Agenda:
- Roll call/updates to SOI
- Final report from Sub Team 1 (on Section 1.3.2 of the WG’s Initial Report)
- Discussion of issues identified by Sub Team 1
- Identification of issues for further WG consideration arising from public comments received to WG Preliminary Recommendations #16-20 (see WG Public Comment Review Tool Part 3, circulated on 21 August)
- Next steps
MP3 Recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-25aug15-en.mp3
Meeting Transcript: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-ppsai-25aug15-en.pdf
Attendees:
Graeme Bunton RrSG
Val Sherman IPC
Kathy Kleiman NCSG
Stephanie Perrin NCSG
Terri Stumme BC
Todd Williams IPC
Sara Bockey RrSG
Roger Carney - RrSG
Frank Michlick Individual
Steve Metalitz – IPC
Volker Greimann - RrSG
Sarah Wyld – RrSG
Darcy Southwell – RrSG
James Bladel RrSG
David Hughes - IPC
Phil Corwin – BC
James Gannon NCUC
Holly Raiche ALAC
Paul McGrady IPC
Dick Leaning, Individul
Susan Prosser RrSG
Susan Kawaguchi – BC
Vicky Scheckler IPC
Alex Deacon - IPC
Luc Seufer RrSG
David Cake- NCSG
Carlton Samuels – ALAC
Griffin Barnett- IPC
Kiran Malancharuvil - IPC
Osvaldo Novoa – ISPCP
Rudi Vansnick – NPOC
Lindsay Hamilton-Reid RrSG
Apologies:
Don Blumenthal - RySG
Michele Neylon - RrSG
ICANN staff:
Marika Konings
Mary Wong
Amy Bivins
Nathalie Peregrine
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 25 August 2015
Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the PPSAI WG call on the 25th August 2015
Holly Raiche:So how was the tea?
Graeme Bunton - RrSG:Haven't tried it yet, still too hot
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Hi All, good afternoon from rainy Ireland
Stephanie Perrin:Should we all buy new raincoats before Dublin, James? Sounds wet....
Holly Raiche:Does it ever not rain in Ireland!
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Yes please bring waterproof clothing in October
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Haha basicaally no =)
Alex Deacon:morning all.
Dick Leaning:noted :-)
James Bladel:Sorry, but I cannot hear Alex.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Very quiet
Holly Raiche:Sounds almost under water
Nathalie Peregrine:Alex Deacon's comments might not be captrued on the recordings, he is too faint
Nathalie Peregrine:*captured
Graeme Bunton - RrSG:Subteam site: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=54691534
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Yes I think that the important thing here is the differentiation between a request and a legal requirement (Eg. Nat Sec Letter, Gag order)
steve metalitz:Note that the draft recommendations Val is describing appear in the summary section of the document beginning on page 11
Alex Deacon:summary is that I plan to send a draft set of recommendations and proposed updates to the report for Question 1 for review this week.
Mary Wong:Thanks, Steve - apologies, I should have noted that for everyone!
Stephanie Perrin:lost sound for quite a while there
Graeme Bunton - RrSG:Just you Stephanie, i think.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:And Privacy law may also apply in some jusrisdictions
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Alex I think your mic is open
Luc Seufer:I am hearing an echo and a washing machine
Mary Wong:Think it's gone now, not sure who or what it was
Alex Deacon:should be closed now.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Perfect thanks!
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:I have discovered swiping right on a macbook trackpad now goes back to the last page loaded oops!
Graeme Bunton - RrSG:Can we make sure that lands on Sub team 3s plate Mary?
Mary Wong:Got it
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Yes
steve metalitz:For example our recommendations 6-8 deal with disclosure of p/p service provider policies. The tentative recommendations from the subgroup fon qs. 2 and 3 support these.
steve metalitz:subgroup on 2 and 3
Dick Leaning:James is correct- same type of thing in the UK
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Yes essentially we shouldnt get invoved in national law issues.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Just point them to lookat their own jurisdictions
steve metalitz:@Stephanie can you give a specific example of a case where providers would be required by law to disclose to customer that there had been a request from law enforcement?
Holly Raiche:I think what we are doing is have aa baseline set of rules - providers can have terms of service aove that
Holly Raiche:'above'
Stephanie Perrin:yes, needs to be applicable law...includes international
James Bladel:No objection to Paul's change. I thin kthat mirrors language in the RAA.
Holly Raiche:applicable is fine
Luc Seufer:I am fine with applicable it's more comprehensive
Paul McGrady:Thanks!
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Works for me
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Understood , I would oike to see providers enabled to make a call on some way of blanking out details when they provider determines its a genuine user but still wants to terminate.
Luc Seufer:a sentence with a "reasonnable" in bold letter comes to mind
Mary Wong:@Phil, the WG's prelim rec #8 says providers must disclose in ToS "specific grounds upon which a customer’s details may be Disclosed or Published or service suspended or terminated"
Kathy Kleiman:@Steve: in response to the question to Stephanie above, there are privacy laws that require consent of the customer/patron/client before certain information is disclosed to law enforcement (especially where LE is operating without a court order). In those cases, the customer would be notified (by law)
James Bladel:Sorry....
steve metalitz:@Kathy, thanks, can you provide a citation?
James Bladel:Yield to the queue
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:https://dataprotection.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=1467&ad=1#5.
James Bladel:Only if your P/P provider violated their accreditation agreement.
Stephanie Perrin:How does one prove that they violated it?
steve metalitz:WG Rec. 8 also requires provider to spell out whether customer is notified of disclosure request.
Stephanie Perrin:I think that just as there are allegations that bogus proxy service providers exist to hide crooks, bogus PP providers may crop up to entrap
Val Sherman:Yes
Val Sherman:sorry - -that was responding to Graeme
Stephanie Perrin:This is why we need some kind of robust appeal mechanism, and not rely on contract law in each jurisdiction as discussed in the earlier question
Holly Raiche:I hink we have to be careful to say LEA in the provider's jurisdiction
Volker A. Greimann:Indeed, but there is no guarantee that the malware /spam/etc is distributed by the domain owner
Volker A. Greimann:in most cases, it is likely a hacked wordpress
Kathy Kleiman:@Steve: agree these are difficult questions without easy answers (non-LE/non-IP) -- but neither are they "implementation details" for ICANN staff. So another group would need to develop this through the PDP process...
Stephanie Perrin:An LEA has to provide lawful authority to prevent disclosure to the individual in many jurisdictions. Regrettably, it is not always the case that the offiicer making the request is necessarily doing so according to the letter of the law. This is why it is important to spell out best practices so that providers will at least be aware of what they should be requestioning in terms of authority, according to applocable law. Obviousl y
Stephanie Perrin:this does not apply so much to the large providers.
Stephanie Perrin:That was requesting, of course, sorry
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Yes just need to keep tying everyhting together as we work along through the subteams
Mary Wong:Sub Team 2
Mary Wong:On SEction 1.3.3 (online financial transactions)
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:thanks all
Paul McGrady:great call!
Luc Seufer:Merci
Mary Wong:Thanks Sub Team 1 and everyone!
Val Sherman:Thanks all
James Bladel:Thanks
