Re: [gnso-dow123] Test for inclusion of data in Whois output

["Milton Mueller" <Mueller@xxxxxxx>]

Jordyn:
Thanks for this helpful framing of the issue. Here are some of my initial 
comments, keeping in mind that I was not on the call and therefore cannot 
benefit from those discussions.

>>> "Jordyn A. Buchanan" <jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 5/15/2006 1:03:03 AM >>>

>Whether or not displaying the data is INCONSISTENT WITH the purpose  
>of Whois

This is the strongest and in some ways easiest to apply test. Few if any will 
disagree that if a data element is inconsistent with the purpose it should not 
be displayed. However, it should not be the only test, because it is too narrow 
to be the only one; it is easy to imagine data elements that are not outright 
contradictory to the purpose but which are unnecessary or unrelated to the 
purpose and therefore should not be displayed. 

> Whether or not the data is NECESSARY to fulfill the purpose of Whois

This is what I think should be the primary test. If the data is not necessary 
to fulfill the functions then it should not be publicly displayed. 

I think that the concept of "NECESSARY" needs to be supplemented by a concept 
of "HARMFUL BYPRODUCTS" of display. In other words, if displaying a data 
element is of questionable necessity to the purpose of Whois, but also has the 
potential to cause definite harmful effects on registrants, registrars, ISPs or 
registries, then the data element should not be displayed. A clear case of this 
is home address. This information is not needed for the technical coordination 
and configuration purposes of Whois, but its display can have all kinds of bad 
side effects, from stalking to identity theft. 

> Whether or not the data is HELPFUL in fulfilling the purpose of Whois

This criteria seems not serious to me. IT is too vague and overly broad, one 
can always posit scenarios in which a data element might be "helpful" but I 
prefer the much striucter "necessary" standard.

>- Whether or not the data is RELATED to the purpose of Whois

This is a better standard but is too vague, "necessary" seems to say the same 
thing more precisely.