Re: [gnso-acc-sgb] Private vs. business Whois

["Milton Mueller" <Mueller@xxxxxxx>]

Sorry to be a bureaucrat but this has devolved into a subgroup C
discussion. subgroup C was specifically charged to come up with
proposals related to the nature of the registrant; e.g., legal person vs
natural person.  

>>> "Natris, Wout de" <W.deNatris@xxxxxxx> 5/22/2007 3:20 AM >>>
John and others,

The private/business approach would definitely be useful. There's one
but from a EU privacy point of view. The name of the employee who is
mentioned as contactperson, etc. in the Whois data is concidered
private
also.

For OPTA this distinction is fine as long the privacy sensitive
information is accessable for LEAs in a form of tiered access after
complaints on a website are received.

Best,

Wout

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx] Namens John Levine
Verzonden: dinsdag 22 mei 2007 7:13
Aan: gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
Onderwerp: Re: [gnso-whois-wg] GAC's position on Whois

>>>> "Suzanne Sene" <ssene@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 5/18/2007 10:52 AM >>>
>>access to whois data in support of those activities is legal in the 
>>united states.  in other words, there is no inconsistency between 
>>public access to whois data and national laws.
>
>in the above sentence, insert "U.S." between "whois data and" and 
>"national laws"

Good point.  But then add:

"or anywhere else, for the vast majority of domains that are
registered
by businesses and organizations rather than individuals."

It is my impression that most places consider people to have
considerably more privacy rights than organizations.  Even here in the
U.S., if I rent a box at the post office, if I rent it as myself my
physical info is private, if I rent it as a business it's not.

Most domains are registered by businesses.  All the ones used for
phishing and scams are businesses by definition. We could make our
lives
a whole lot easier if we treated organizational and individual
registrants differently, and redacted the contact info for the people
who, by law and custom, can reasonably expect that, and not for the
organizations that don't.

R's,
John


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
Dit e-mailbericht kan vertrouwelijke informatie bevatten of informatie
die is beschermd door een beroepsgeheim.
Indien dit bericht niet voor u is bestemd, wijzen wij u erop dat elke
vorm van verspreiding, vermenigvuldiging
of ander gebruik ervan niet is toegestaan.
Indien dit bericht blijkbaar bij vergissing bij u terecht is gekomen,
verzoeken wij u ons daarvan
direct op de hoogte te stellen via tel.nr 070 315 3500 of e-mail
mailto:mail@xxxxxxx en het bericht te vernietigen.
Dit e-mailbericht is uitsluitend gecontroleerd op virussen.
OPTA aanvaardt geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor de feitelijke inhoud
en juistheid van dit bericht en er kunnen 
geen rechten aan worden ontleend.


This e-mail message may contain confidential information or information
protected by professional privilege.
If it is not intended for you, you should be aware that any
distribution, copying or other form of use of
this message is not permitted.
If it has apparently reached you by mistake, we urge you to notify us
by phone +31 70 315 3500
or e-mail mailto:mail@xxxxxxx and destroy the message immediately.
This e-mail message has only been checked for viruses.
The accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of the information
provided cannot be guaranteed.
OPTA expressly disclaims any responsibility in relation to the
information in this e-mail message.
No rights can be derived from this message.