RE: [alac] ALERT: What is WHOIS really fpr

[Izumi AIZU <aizu@xxxxxxx>]

Another endorsement for tiered approach, no public disclosure,
but limited access provided to law enforcement and other socially
justfieable process with clearly defined process.

Will see you all on Sunday hopefully before noon.

izumi

At 08:10 06/06/23 -0400, Jean Armour Polly wrote:
> I agree with both of you and I like the idea of seeing who has accessed 
> your whois data, Bret. As long as THAT isn't anonymized. :-)
>
>
>
> At 11:00 AM +0000 6/23/06, Roberto Gaetano recently said:
> > I fully agree with Bret, the solution is not a plain YES or NO, is 
> > rather on how we put a reasonable system in place that takes into account 
> > all stakeholders.
> >
> > Quite a while ago, I believe it was in Tunis, but I might be wrong, I 
> > made the example of car licence plates. The file is accessible for law 
> > enforcement and any other legal reasons, but data is not publicly available.
> >
> > Another item I raised in the same meeting was who is benefitting and 
> > who is paying. Intellectual Property lawyers would like to use the Whois 
> > to check IP violations, but the registrars or registry, depending on the 
> > model, has to offer this service for free. It is like if a large 
> > multinational corporation would force all national car licence plates 
> > registries to offer free access to the corporation to search whether any 
> > of the local affiliates own cars.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Roberto GAETANO
> > ALAC
> > ICANN BoD Liaison
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: "Bret Fausett" <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: "'John M Levine'" <johnl@xxxxxxxx>,        "'Annette Muehlberg'" 
> > > <annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx>
> > > CC: "'ALAC'" <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: RE: [alac] ALERT: What is WHOIS really fpr
> > > Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:59:10 -0700
> > >
> > > >  I can tell you from personal experience that WHOIS
> > > >  info, even in its current rather imperfect form, is very
> > > >  useful when tracking them down.
> > >
> > > You're right that whois has some practical uses in law enforcement, etc. At
> > > the same time, the required public disclosure of identity information also
> > > has some privacy implications. At the end of the day, we're still going to
> > > have to make a judgment call about whether the benefits of public whois data
> > > outweigh the privacy consequences.
> > >
> > > The proposal I like is the "tiered access" model. The concept is that
> > > personal data is unavailable to the general public via simple whois queries
> > > but available to law enforcement, ISPs, lawyers, etc. who sign up for
> > > special access. Another idea I like is a system that would allow the
> > > registrant to review his/her own whois data to see who has accessed the
> > > 'second-tiered' information. This seems like a decent compromise, or at
> > > least as close to a middle ground as we're likely to see.
> > >
> > >       Bret
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Don稚 just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
> > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/