ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-dow123]


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

RE: [gnso-dow123] REMINDER: suggested revisions for recommendation #2

  • To: Whois TF mailing list <gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Jordyn A. Buchanan" <jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] REMINDER: suggested revisions for recommendation #2
  • From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 04:53:24 -0700

<div>I should&nbsp;clarify our position as a registrar, that we do not
support any recommendaton on this topic at all. As has been pointed out
to the TF before, secton&nbsp;3.7.2 of the RAA&nbsp;already covers
this:&nbsp;"Registrar shall abide by applicable laws and governmental
regulations."</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Any registrar is capable of contacting ICANN to open a dialogue when
a conflict exists. Whois is just one area where that could occur. We
don't believe a precedent should be set where PDPs get started on every
area or situation where such conflicts might occur. That is not
practical nor achievable.<BR><BR>My recommendations on b. and c. below
are made out of concern that this recommendation might become policy,
and in such case we would like it to do as little harm as possible.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Tim</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid"><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE:
[gnso-dow123] REMINDER: &nbsp;suggested revisions for<BR>recommendation
#2<BR>From: "Tim Ruiz" &lt;tim@xxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Fri, June 17,
2005 6:31 am<BR>To: "Jordyn A. Buchanan"
&lt;jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Cc: "Whois TF mailing list"
&lt;gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>
<DIV>I suggest the following revisions&nbsp;of b. and c. of the policy
portion:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>b. &nbsp;Resolving the conflict if possible, doing so&nbsp;in a
manner conducive to </DIV>
<DIV>ICANN's Mission,&nbsp;applicable Core Values, and&nbsp;the
stability and uniformity of </DIV>
<DIV>the Whois system;<BR><BR>c. &nbsp;Providing a mechanism for the
consideration, in appropriate &nbsp;<BR>circumstances where the
conflict cannot be otherwise resolved, of an &nbsp;<BR>exception to
contractual obligations with regard to collection, &nbsp;<BR>display
and distribution of personally identifiable data via Whois;
and<BR></DIV>
<DIV>Article I Section 2. of ICANN's bylaws states in part:</DIV>
<DIV>Any ICANN body making a recommendation or decision shall exercise
its judgment to determine which core values are most relevant and how
they apply to the specific circumstances of the case at hand, and to
determine, if necessary, an appropriate and defensible balance among
competing values.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Since this recommendation does not address this in&nbsp;specifics I
think it is important that b. be revised to at least recognize this
requirement. Also, it wasn't completely clear&nbsp;what the&nbsp;phrase
*if possible* referred to. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Part c. as written could be taken to mean that ICANN *must* make an
exception where a conflict cannot otherwise be resolved. That conflicts
with part d., and I don't believe any of us on this TF have the
foresight to see all possible situations where this policy may come
into play. This can easily be&nbsp;clarified by changing *recognition*
to *consideration.*</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Tim<BR><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid"><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject:
[gnso-dow123] REMINDER: &nbsp;suggested revisions for<BR>recommendation
#2<BR>From: "Jordyn A. Buchanan" &lt;jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date:
Thu, June 16, 2005 2:45 pm<BR>To: "Whois TF mailing list"
&lt;gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>Fellow Task Force Members: 
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Please take the opportunity to review the attached recommendation
and procedure for resolving conflicts with national laws.&nbsp; If you
have suggested revisions, please submit them as soon as possible (today
ideally, but in any case no later than tomorrow) so that the other
members of the task force has an opportunity to consider them prior to
sending the recommendation to constituencies for their consideration
and comment.</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Jordyn</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>




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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy