[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC separatism Re: [] ICANN policy policy

[Stephanie Perrin]

OK, perhaps one group of folks would like to have a look at the policy for new Gtlds, available here, and prepare a critique of what is missing (gap analysis) 
gTLD Program is addressed in a separate personal data privacy statement at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/program-privacy.

We could also use some help from someone on analysing the transparency and accountability principles, where the disclosure stuff is apparently buried.  One of the major criticisms of these policies is that it is very difficult for a user/participant at ICANN to find out what is happening to their data. 
Another task where  I would love some help from an American Attorney, is whether it is legally possible to declare  a total disclaimer to breach liability in the state of California, where there are data breach disclosure rules.  (see the following snippet of the policy which I am dubbing a web policy):
Due to the open communication nature of the Internet, ICANN cannot represent, warrant or guarantee that communications stored on ICANN servers will be free from unauthorized access by third parties, loss, misuse or alterations. While ICANN will take reasonable and appropriate security measures to protect against unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration or destruction of personal information received, ICANN DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS OR USE OR COMPROMISE OF YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION. USERS ARE ADVISED THAT THEY SUBMIT SUCH PERSONAL INFORMATION AT THEIR OWN RISK.

I have to say this is one of the paragraphs that really put me right over the top….caps included.
Any volunteers for this task, I am working on the three pager and the basic critique of the web policy.
cheers steph
PS I have still not found the alleged staff policy, if anyone knows where it is please let me know
 
On Mar 30, 2014, at 2:16 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> Thanks, Avri, I share your sentiment and couldn't have said it any better.  Let's all work together and build a stronger noncommercial policy effort by focusing on our shared goals. which are far more in number, than our individual goals.  We are so much more powerful when we work together and support each other.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> On Mar 30, 2014, at 9:37 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 29-Mar-14 17:28, William Drake wrote:
>>> Ok, if the NCUC members who’ve said they want to work on this prefer
>>> to carry NPOC and do it as NCSG
>> 
>> I tend to see it as persisting in the Stakeholder group model and working with all members on policy issues in common as was decided a while back.
>> 
>> When the NCUC-discuss list was established it was with the understanding that it would be for administrativia and not as a way to move all policy discussion away from NCSG-discuss.
>> 
>> I think the NCUC separatist attitude displayed  in "carry NPOC" is unfortunate and something that should be avoided if at all possible.
>> 
>> avri
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20140330/fba56459/attachment-0002.html>