Re: [gnso-dow123] Regarding Letter from American Intellectual Property Law As...
- To: Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Regarding Letter from American Intellectual Property Law As...
- From: KathrynKL@xxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 08:22:24 EDT
Your response to the AIPLA sounds right on target. I wish that the rumors
of what we are doing were not so distorted and out of line. It takes away
from the discussion and debate.
Privately, I wanted to share that I think the debate in GAC may be a more
balanced. As you know, I feared another one-sided debate, and a closet veto
the Council's Purpose of Whois. I contacted data protection commissioners
who have worked with ICANN in the past (from Rome, Vancouver, etc). I think
letters and representatives are coming. I don't have the details, but I
wanted to give you a heads-up.
I would love to be a fly on the wall in a closed-GAC meeting and see the US
FTC debate an EU Data Protection Commissioner. I hope it comes to pass!
I have read the letter from the American Intellectual Property Law
Association. I don't understand how the letter relates to the
formulations 1 or 2. It seems that members of the community have made
pre-mature judgements on the eventual outcomes of the WHOIS work. The
letter raises issues about the importance of the data, and the need for
access to that data by law enforcement and other legitimate parties.
This seems entirely consistent with the current terms of reference of
the WHOIS task force. I have sent the following reply to clarify that
there are no changes in collected data, nor in the requirement for that
data to be accurate. The more important work has yet to be done, which
is developing better access controls.