Re: EU data protection, was: Extensions in regards to NTLDs
Klaus Malorny <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 21/12/11 13:49, Jim Reid wrote: > On 21 Dec 2011, at 10:42, Klaus Malorny wrote: > > [...] Hi Jim, first, I think I have stated clearly enough that this was my very personal opinion. Second, my insight *mostly* refers to my work with puntCAT. I got aware of some correspondence between the involved parties, including, but not limited to, the puntCAT organization and ICANN. Indeed, as you guessed, Telnic's/Neustar's deployed model played a major role and caused very valid arguments to be disregarded. And these arguments were not new. Whoever worked on the Telnic solution must have come across these also, and you actually confirmed it in your response to my e-mail. Regarding data protection, I have a clear opinion, namely that ICANN's claims have to recede behind the EU's and national privacy regulations, if the registry is located in the EU. And that the right of a person to have his data not to be disclosed does not depend on the use of the contact, so that the contact is the only valid place to define the disclosure. That said, I don't want to kick off a discussion here about the various views, but simply to explain my motivation. Regards, Klaus _______________________________________________ provreg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg