[bc-gnso] FW: New ICA Webpost on Alleged Misrepresentation re:Thick WHOIS @.Com

[Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

FYI--

http://internetcommerce.org/WHOIS_Misrepresentation%3F

GNSO Council to Discuss Whether ICANN Engaged in "Misrepresentation of the 
Truth" on Thick WHOIS for .Com
Submitted by Philip Corwin on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 17:09
In our recent post on the proposed renewal draft of the .Com registry contract 
we noted that, in addition to appropriately rejecting IP sector urgings that 
the untested URS be foisted on 100-million-plus .Com domains through 
contractual fiat, and to continuing the price increase cap provisions of the 
current contract, the document contained other significant provisions including 
"Deferral of 'thick WHOIS' implementation, with that matter shunted to the GNSO 
policy process". (http://internetcommerce.org/DotCom_Deja_Vu).
ICA policy calls for its members to provide correct WHOIS contact information 
and to comply with lawful requests for data placed under privacy protection. 
And our understanding has been that VeriSign is neutral on whether .Com should 
continue to have "thin WHOIS" - with the more detailed registrant data still 
available but residing at their registrars -- or should be required to convert 
to the "thick WHOIS" database maintained by other gTLDs.
So we thought the issue of "thick WHOIS" at .Com was relatively 
non-controversial. But perhaps not.
We were reviewing the agenda 
(http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-12apr12-en.htm) for the upcoming 
April 12th meeting of ICANN's GNSO Council and were somewhat startled to come 
across this agenda item:
            Item 5: GNSO Council comment on .COM contract renewal (10 minutes)
In its announcement on the .COM contract renewal dated 27 March 2012 
(http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27mar12-en.htm) ICANN 
states that the question of transitioning a large existing registry to thick 
WHOIS has been recognised by the GNSO as raising operational and other issues 
that require further discussion and consideration 
(http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27mar12-en.htm).
So Council discussions are being cited as the rationale for the fact that the 
2012 .COM contract contains no obligations on the registry operator to switch 
to a thick WHOIS format. Considering the debate that went on at Council level 
on this issue, the Council may deem this to be a misrepresentation of the 
truth. If so, the Council may then wish to draft a statement outlining this and 
direct the Chair to send it to the Board.
5.1Discussion
5.2 Next steps
(Emphasis added)
We don't know the full background on why some members of the GNSO Council may 
view ICANN's announcement as having 'misrepresented the truth' in regard to 
their debate on this matter, so we'll await review of the meeting transcript of 
the upcoming Council discussion.
But we think it's worrisome when ICANN's gTLD policymaking body schedules a 
discussion of such an internal communications matter. Given the upcoming 
challenges of processing hundreds (or thousands) of new gTLD applications, the 
imminent installation of a new CEO and any resulting management alterations, 
the uncertainty about whether ICANN will be re-awarded the IANA contract and 
what new obligations and commitments that may entail, and the ongoing global 
debate regarding the future shape and substance of Internet governance, ICANN's 
senior community members need to be working cooperatively on these major 
challenges - not exchanging bickering views over whether one side 
misrepresented the position of the other as a rationale for its own action in 
regard to an important yet secondary issue that should be amenable to 
reasonable resolution.
We hope the GNSO Council will quickly resolve this with ICANN staff in a way 
that minimizes bruised feelings and future miscommunications. Given the current 
stakes for ICANN, can't we all just get along?


Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey