ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-dow123]


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

[gnso-dow123] Proposal Premise Presupposes Publication

  • To: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: [gnso-dow123] Proposal Premise Presupposes Publication
  • From: Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 13:13:31 -0400

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Procedural concerns aside, I'm beginning to believe that this proposal
is rooted in a very flawed assumption, specifically that;

Privacy is a privilege.

The proposal provides a mechanism by which registrars who are located in
jurisdictions with more restrictive privacy legislation to remain
compliant with the RAA's requirement for a high level of personal data
disclosure.

For instance, this proposal would allow a European based registrar to
become compliant with EU privacy directives and offer their registrants
an additional level of privacy.

Unfortunately, this additional level of privacy would only be available
to customers of registrars subject to the directive, because there is no
mechanism for registrars out-of-jurisdiction to offer their customers
similar benefits.

Doesn't this seem to be a bit backwards?

Jordyn indicates that no other options were looked at - I'd like to
press on this a bit. It appears that the task force is attempting to use
an exception based approached to deal with regional breakouts of
privacyitis. Doesn't it make much more sense to offer registrants these
types of protections on a much more global basis by enhancing the
capability of registrars and registries by implementing privacy policies
specifically targetted at individuals?

There are any number of ways that we could seek to address the needs to
those who wish to be contacted with the needs of those who don't want to
be contacted and most certainly, balance the legitimate interests of
those seeking an additional level of disclosure because of operational
or legal concerns.

The proposal, as it stands, seems overly intent on dealing with symptoms
that future policy implementations might possibly avoid if the GNSO took
a more progressive stance on Whois policy and individual privacy rights.

For these reasons, I'm not inclined to support this proposal in advance
of actually dealing with the privacy rights and disclosure obligations
found in ICANN's whois policy.

Regards,

- --




                       -rwr



Tucows Start Service: http://start.tucows.com

My contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross
My weblog: http://www.byte.org/

"You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus."
 - Mark Twain
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)

iD8DBQFCbna76sL06XjirooRAhQbAJ9bJj8Ge15is0OCSIVELwNHjHVYUwCeKcj8
zSQ0Ihf9/6+V8HFiWn2fS+0=
=hOt7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy