RE: [bc-gnso] RE: For BC review & comment: draft response to Whois Review Team

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'll add RNA Partners voice of support to Lynn's recommendation for a
broader definition.

 

Kind regards,

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA Partners, Inc.

 

  _____  

From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Marilyn Cade
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 2:16 AM
To: Lynn Goodendorf; Steve Delbianco
Cc: Janet Callaghan; Berry Cobb; sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx; Elisa Cooper;
bc - GNSO list
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] RE: For BC review & comment: draft response to Whois
Review Team

 


My suggestion is that the BC position should strongly support the broader
definition. All Web and Internet statistics use the concept of individuals
who use the Internet -- e.g. who have access to the Internet.  And, I agree
with Lynn [and others] that the AoC intended to refer to that broader
characterization.  

 

Does the draft need to make all that clearer in its language? 



  _____  

From: lynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
CC: jocallaghan@xxxxxxxxxxxx; berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx; Elisa.Cooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; bc-GNSO@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bc-gnso] RE: For BC review & comment: draft response to Whois
Review Team
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 17:59:10 -0700

Thanks Steve for this draft and the work of the BC to provide productive
comments.

 

As an member of the Whois Review Team, I would personally appreciate support
from the BC for the broader definition of "consumer" as a global Internet
user rather than the narrow definition that would limit the concept of
consumers to registrants and ICANN stakeholders. 

 

I maintain that the broader definition is consistent with language in other
sections of the AOC that refer to "public interest" and "Internet users" as
well as the policy requirement for public availability of Whois data.

 

Also, I believe members of the BC have first hand experience with the UDRP
process and a good understanding of the dependency on Whois data for dispute
resolution.  The BC perspective on this specific need for accurate and
reliable Whois data would be helpful in progressing our work.

Lynn

 

 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: For BC review & comment: draft response to Whois Review Team
From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, April 07, 2011 2:46 pm
To: "bc-GNSO@xxxxxxxxx" <bc-GNSO@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Janet O'Callaghan <jocallaghan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lynn Goodendorf
<lynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Berry Cobb
<berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sarah Deutsch
<sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx <http://verizon.com%3e> >;, Elisa Cooper
<Elisa.Cooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <http://markmonitor.com%3e> >;

ICANN is gathering responses to questions posed by the Whois review team. 

 

Attached is a discussion draft for BC response prepared by Elisa Cooper.
(Steve DelBianco added a bit about Whois studies)   

 

On our last member call, several others also volunteered to add to this
response, so we're looking forward to your additions:

Sara Deutsch

Berry Cobb

Lynn Goodendorf

Janet O'Callaghan

 

ICANN's Comment period closes 17-Apr.    Today (7-Apr) begins an 8-day
review period for this discussion draft. We can submit this response later
if members feel they need the entire 14-day review and discussion period. 

 

Please review and post your suggestions/edits as soon as possible.   If
there are no disagreements noted by 17-Apr, this response will be adopted
without a voting period, and posted to ICANN.

 

For topic background, see http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#whois-rt 

 

Thanks again to Elisa Cooper for serving as BC Rapporteur on this.  

 

 

 

Regards,

Steve DelBianco

Vice chair for policy coordination