Re: [alac] Proposed ALAC restatement on WHOIS (draft2)

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2003-10-28 06:53:57 -0800, Wendy Seltzer wrote:

>>I'd only suggest one more change (apologies for the last minute
>>suggestion):
> >
> >> Unfortunately, there has been no progress since February.
> >> Indeed, on the privacy front, there has been regress.  Domain
> >> name registrants are forbidden from using pseudonyms or fuzzy,
> >
> >I'd strike "Indeed, ..., there has been regress" -- that's a fact
> >statement which might be somewhat hard to back up.

> It was my view that the enforcement of accuracy is regress,
> unless you're saying that no names have actually been dropped for
> "inaccuracy" of registration data.

I can't say that, but then again, I haven't anything to back up the
claim that more names have been dropped, either.

> Even then, registrants have been dissuaded from registering or
> using domain names by the threats of accuracy enforcement.

Point taken.  Seems like I need a refresher in chilling effects 101.
;-)

How about this alternative, with a little more weight on
"enforcement"?

        Unfortunately, there has been no progress since February.
        Indeed, on the privacy front, there has been regress. Domain
        name registrants who want to use pseudonyms or fuzzy,
        "inaccurate" data in order to protect their privacy need to
        take the risk that they will lose their domain name due to
        enforcement of accuracy policies, yet there are no new
        safeguards or mechanisms by which they can shield their
        identifying details from disclosure.  As many feared at the
        time the GNSO mandated stricter enforcement of "accuracy" on
        registrants and registrars, domain name registrants
        (including members of the at-large public) lose out.

-- 
Thomas Roessler  <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At-Large Advisory Committee: http://alac.info/