Opposing the proposal (it's to different from .SHARP)

[Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@xxxxxxxx>]

The arguments about the searchable Whois interface for .SHARP can't be
reused for .MEET without serious reconsideration. .MEET is a TLD open to the
public. So the impact is different for .MEET and .SHARP.

The main question is (for me): Do we need Whois at all, or do we need it for
a specific purpose?

If we claim a use case for Whois to get in touch with the technical people
running the delegated zone in the case of technical problems (which is the
traditional interpretation by the technical community), than the Whois
service could not be removed.

If we claim a use case for Whois to get the contact details of the
administrative persons in the case of misuse (which is the modern
interpretation by the IP community), than the Whois service could not be
removed.

If we claim a use case for Whois to get the contact details of the
responsible persons in the case of criminal activities (which is the
interpretation by the LAEs), than the public Whois service can be shut down
as long as the unlimited access for those special groups is guaranteed.

If we claim the privacy rights do outweigh the other use cases (which is the
modern interpretation by various groups incl. technical), than the Whois
service has to be shut down as well as the collection of data for even
internal Whois has to be stopped.

So from my point of view I'd suggest to keep the public Whois as long as the
data is collected for the LAEs. If the registry will get a permit to stop
the public interface, the collection of data has to be stopped also.

Consequently I oppose the proposal.

Lutz Donnerhacke