ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

RE: [gnso-dow123] Alternative proposal re Whois

  • To: "Paul Stahura" <stahura@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Alternative proposal re Whois
  • From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:21:28 -0400

So much for policy development processes. I guess we might as well disband the TF, since the Board already appears to have decided.


At 03:07 PM 9/29/2006 -0700, Paul Stahura wrote:


in #5 it says

"icann shall continue to enforce existing policy relating to whois, such
existing policy requires that icann implement measures to maintain
timely, unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete whois
information, including registrant, technical, billing and administrative
contact information"

I guess that rules out OPOC.
By the way, billing contacts have not been require output since....
well... its been so long, I can't remember when (or even if they ever
were required).   Do we now need to change the registrar contracts to
require billing contact information in the whois output?  I mean you'd
have to go back like 10 years (no kidding) to copy-past this language
from some ancient internet document into this important ICANN-DoC
agreement.  Technically, I wonder if ICANN is already in breach.

-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html Chilling Effects: http://www.chillingeffects.org

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy