ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [alac] DRAFT ALAC Statement on Whois

  • To: Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx>, Vittorio Bertola <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [alac] DRAFT ALAC Statement on Whois
  • From: Jean Polly <mom@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 05:55:27 -0400

I have personally had several occasions to need contact information from whois in order to make complaints about both trademark and copyright infringement. As a content provider, I think the whois information should remain open to all. On the other hand, as a domain name owner I am sure my email address has been harvested many times, added to spam lists, etc. I would just like to know that a human is looking me up, not a bot. Just put a capcha in it.

Thanks
JP

At 04:28 AM 6/29/2006, Annette Muehlberg wrote:
thank you bret, for your good draft. but i do agree with vittorio. this is too short now to integrate in the report. we should be able to consult with the ALAC before.

But I think we all agree that privacy should be implemented and offered for free to all registrants as part of the general regulation of the DNS, rather than sold as an additional service for extra money.

I could add this to the report.

best
annette

Vittorio Bertola wrote:

Bret Fausett ha scritto:

You all may have something in the works already, but while it was on my
mind, I took a few minutes this afternoon and drafted a possible statement
on whois for the ALAC. It's below as text and attached in Word. I won't be
available in the early morning hours in Marrakech, so I turn this over to
the group to take forward, revise, or drop.


Generally speaking, it is a good statement.

I only have some concerns about the last point, possibly coming from the well known philosophical difference about privacy between the US (where privacy is a service that you buy) and most other countries (where privacy is a human right that you enjoy by default). In practice, I absolutely agree that we have to push for ICANN not to restrict the "privacy services" that many registrars have started to sell (even if, I would add, these privacy services should implement themselves some sort of tiered access system, because at this point in time, while registrants in non-privacy-enabled domains are too accessible, I find registrants in privacy-enabled domains too opaque, and I know directly of at least one case where someone, using a US privacy protection registration system, has been running actual criminal frauds in Italy) but I would state very clearly that privacy should be implemented and offered for free to all registrants as part of the general regulation of the DNS, rather than sold as an additional service for extra money.

However, I'm not sure whether we have time to finalize this statement between now and Annette's presentation (two hours). I suspect this might require extensive discussion, also given that we know that there are members of the Committee who have other points of view (e.g. John), and, if I were the Chair, I would not like to release any statement on a matter before being sure that all known viewpoints have at least been stated and discussed. But this is Annette's call.





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy