Michele Neylon is not happy with ICANN. Actually, heâs âangry, frustrated and unhappyâ.
The reason is, âICANN has put us and other European Union based registrars in an utterly ridiculous situation,â Neylon wrote on his Blacknight Solutions blog.
âWe are expected to ask ICANN for permission to comply with Irish and EU data privacy law.
âOr put another way, an Irish company is obliged to jump through hoops with a California based corporation in order to be able to operate within Irish law.â
Itâs a situation that has been brewing for some time Neylon wrote, with discussions with ICANN happening for the last two years.
His company went from being a domain name reseller to an ICANN-accredited registrar to cut out the middleman. And now a new contract has been published, but as he notes âthe new contract has issues if youâre based in the EU.â
âThe central tenet of data privacy law is summed up in Article 6(e) of the European Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC which deals with retention of data (emphasis added):
Â Â Â kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected
âWhich under Irish law is Data Protection (Amendment) Act 2003:
Â Â Â âArticle 4 (e). preserved in a form which permits identification of the data subjects for no longer than is required for the purpose for which those data are storedâ
âHowever ICANN explicitly demands that registrars retain the data for way longer.â
Neylonâs problem is that the period of time ICANN want the data to be held is âsimply too longâ.
To seek some clarification, Neylon reached out to Irelandâs Data Protection Commissioner, and they advised, in short, âwithout any rationale for the data being held for so long they had issues with itâ.
The EU also has problems with the requirement. Neylon writes the âEuropean Union, has written to ICANN on several occasions telling them clearly that the 2013 RAA is not compatible with EU law.
âThey also made it very clear that they didnât think it was reasonable to ask every EU based ICANN accredited registrar to jump through hoops to get an exemption to the clauses.â
And then he asks âWhat did ICANN do about it? Short answer â nothing.â
In his posting, Neylon finds it problematical that ICANN doesnât understand law.
To read the post in full, see blog.blacknight.com/blow-fuse.html.