• Arbitrations
• Meetings
• ATAgendaandMinutes-20101207

• To Arbitration Arbitrations - To Arbitration Training & Lessons

• Back to Arbitration Team Meetings - To Previous meeting - To Next meeting

Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-12-07 (21 CET / 20 UTC (wintertime!))

• 1 Preliminaries

  • 1.1 Chair opens the Committee Meeting

  • 1.2 Accept the Minutes Minutes of the last Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-11-02 (u60)

• 2 Businesses - Important Note: Acceptance of Businesses 48 Hours before beginning of Arbitration Team Meeting latest!

  • 2.1 Action items from last meeting (Updates) added by UlrichSchroeter

    • 2.1.1 Public and Private part of Arbitration filing (Update) added by UlrichSchroeter

      • First samples added with a private part: a20101114.1 (closed), a20101110.1 (running)

    • 2.1.2 Update on arbitration-archive (Update) added by UlrichSchroeter

      • It seems, the mailbox hasn't been created yet.
      • Action item: Mario, plz send a reminder with progress report req to email admins

  • 2.2 Bulk handling of 30 Delete Account Requests (Update) added by UlrichSchroeter

    • There are questionable execution steps within the "Delete my Account" procedure:
    • SE's "Delete function" revokes certs, and some more steps, but leaves the primary email address in the system.

    • With the Lesson 20 - Arbitration Case - Delete Account Request procedure and a procedure SE's have, the primary email address has to be replaced with the arbitration case number. Also for "Delete my Account" handled by SE's (marios quick procedure).

    • Added Delete My Account Procedure Draft v1 by law

    • Added Delete My Account Procedure Draft v2 by u60

  • 2.3 Top Three added by YourName - Comment: Replace "Top Three" by Title of Top and add your Name

    • Additional Inputs - Comment: Replace "Additional Inputs"by Description of Top, Description of Reason-Why/Purpose, Additional Comments, Additional Documents, Additional Links, if useful for other Arbitration Team Members to prepare for Arbitration Team Meeting.

  • 2.4 Top Four added by YourName - Comment: Replace "Top Four" by Title of Top and add your Name

    • Additional Inputs - Comment: Replace "Additional Inputs"by Description of Top, Description of Reason-Why/Purpose, Additional Comments, Additional Documents, Additional Links, if useful for other Arbitration Team Members to prepare for Arbitration Team Meeting.

  • 2.5 Top Five added by YourName - Comment: Replace "Top Five" by Title of Top and add your Name

    • Additional Inputs - Comment: Replace "Additional Inputs"by Description of Top, Description of Reason-Why/Purpose, Additional Comments, Additional Documents, Additional Links, if useful for other Arbitration Team Members to prepare for Arbitration Team Meeting.

  • et cetera

• 3 Question Time - Important Note: Questions from CAcert.org Community Members can be added until beginning of Arbitration Team Meeting! As well questions can be asked at "Question Time", without added Question here

  • 3.1 "Question One" added by YourName - Comment: Replace "Question One" by Your Question and add your Name

  • et cetera

• 4 Closing

  • 4.1 Confirm next Arbitration Team Meeting: Usually every 1st Tuesday and the 3rd Wednesday of the month, 20:00 CEST (18 UTC).
    • Tuesday, January 4, 2011, 21 CET, 20 UTC (wintertime!)
  • 4.2 Chair closes the Arbitration Team Meeting
  • 4.3 Preparation of Minutes

Minutes - Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-12-07

• 21:00 Chair opens meeting

  • Attendees: Mario, Martin, Uli

• Top 1.2 - minutes from Arbitration team meeting 2010-11-02

  • Summary: 1 aye, 2 abstain, accepted

• Top 2.1 action items from last meeting
  • Top 2.1.1 - Public and Private part of Arbitration filing
    • private parts have been used at least in 2 cases:

      • a20101114.1

      • a20101110.1

    • Summary: information only

  • Top 2.1.2 - Update on arbitration-archive (Update)
    • Action item: Mario, plz send a reminder with progress report req to email admins
    • Q: what is the current state on this ?
      • A: DRO should have access credentials
    • Q: and email address is active ?
      • A: I am not email admin. But I think so.
    • Q: who sends a mail around, to inform all arbitrators, that this email address is now functional and that it has been used on all email communications like cc to case manager ?
      • A: DRO after confirming functionality? Since DRO is the owner of the mailbox he should at least confirm

    • Q: can you please push DRO on this ? and to send around a note to all arbitrators, that from this time on, all communications have to be cc'ed onto the arbitration-archive@c.o ? so we can close this project ?

      • A: OK, will try.

    • Summary and Action item: Mario to contact DRO to confirm working archive for arbitratiion and to send out notifications to arbitrators team

• top 2.2 Bulk handling of 30 Delete Account Requests (Update)

  • in the meanwhile we have: Added Delete My Account Procedure Draft v1 by law Added Delete My Account Procedure Draft v2 by u60, and I'm re-working together with SE on the procedure of delete account for SE's Delete My Account SE Exec Steps Detailed

  • Discussions pro and con v1 / v2, no conclusion
  • We have to assume CCA agreement. And therefor as a fallback under all circumstances should be given a CCA termination date in the ruling
  • Q: What to do with Assurer users that doesn't respond on any emails, phone calls, so the CAP forms are left at users side ? The problem here: CCA termination cannot be set earlier than last assurance date + 7 years
    • A: quick guess: Block account, Ruling: Account not terminated because of missing cooperation
  • Q: but the ongoing problem maybe on one future arb case, where the arb requests infos about the assurance the info is probably lost, as user doesn't respond
    • A: If he is bound to the CCA, he has to.

  • Q: The other problem, the primary email address a user has to change to keep it in good working order ... the user violates CCA -> CCA termination .... so here we're running into a deadlock

    • A: There are many circumstances where a user might not reply to requests from an arbitrator. For now we should leave it up to the arbitrator whether he wants to take further action. If he can't -> send mail to support. It is simply out of our control.

  • Q: Another problem that araises ... propose an arbitration fine ... how we can collect this fine ? if the user doesn't respond ?!?
    • A: Take him to court. Or dismiss.
  • Q: hmm, to court .... interesting .... how to start ? about 15 euro ?!?
    • A: You could do this. However, I am not sure whether CAcert Inc. currently wants to use this in these minor cases.
  • Q: Ok, I say, I want go this way, what I have to do next ?
    • A: Interesting question. You probably need the board or its authorization.
  • Q: so next thing is, rule this in an arbitration, and move it to board ? from my understanding, arbitration is the gateway between CAcert (including board) and external courts
    • A: But while going to court you leave the area which is protected by CCA and DRP.
  • Q: yup, so this is why arbitration is acting as a gateway here
    • A: I am not sure, but you as an individual going to court might be not the best starting position. So you have to do this as CAcert Inc. And for acting on behalf of CAcert Inc. you need a mendate.
  • Q: This can be given thru an arbitration followed by a board motion or similiar way
    • A: yes. But giving you this authorization to go to court might also need some more discussion at Board level and in an broader arbitration field. This is just my expectation. And from by PoV for now I would not like to agree to the risk/costs a trial might require.
  • Q: so my conclusion for the moment: if someone is bound to CCA and violates CCA and has to be fined, to get this user to be fined seems to be impossible for the moment
    • A: ... unless the user pays by himself. as long as we do not have anything to put pressure on users outside of CAcert I see good reason to fine users.
  • Q: good reasons to fine users I see only if they are feel to be bound ... but leaving this area, especialy on delete my account, we loose
    • A: e.g. for password resets this works. The users wants his account back, so he pays. But if the user give a shit on CAcert, we would not have any possibility to enforce this inside of CCA and DRP.
  • Q: so the leaving of users and to protect the WoT is somehow in danger
    • A: So the only solution left which I can think about is (civil) court. But this might include huge risks and costs CAcert might not be able to bear. Yes. But leaving does not only apply to delete requests. It also includes unresponsive people.
  • Q: So with a 1000 Euro liability limitation, this risk (to go to court) is also void. 2nd conclusion: we cannot protect the WoT until the users leaving CAcert are willing to respond on arbitrators request for eg CAP forms
    • A: Yes. But I never expected anything differently.

  • Summary: discussion, no conclusions

• Top 4.1 - next meeting: Tuesday, January 4, 2011, 21 CET, 20 UTC (wintertime!) ?

  • Summary: 3x ok, accepted

• 22:25 Thanks for coming, chair closes meeting

Meeting Transcript

• Meeting Transcript 2010-12-07 (Transcripts-Page-Template)

Inputs & Thoughts

• YYYYMMDD-YourName

• Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please

• YYYYMMDD-YourName

• Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please

• CategoryArbitration

• CategoryArbMeeting