ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

RE: [gnso-dow123] Changes to OPOC proposal: deletion instead of unmasking

  • To: "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Changes to OPOC proposal: deletion instead of unmasking
  • From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 16:24:09 -0400

Precisely. Nothing I suggest (or anyone in the TF suggests) can change the operation of legal process. If a party with legitimate reason obtains a subpoena or court order compelling disclosure of information by someone who holds that information, the court order controls (if it has jurisdiction).

If our terms of reference were broad enough to allow changing of the data collected, I would put my suggestion in at an earlier point -- that a registrant could opt at the time of registration not to leave any personally-connected contact information (and thus nothing that could be subpoenaed later) and by doing so risk the cancellation of his name upon a legal complaint.

Under the current terms of reference, all I can propose is that parties seeking unwanted disclosure should go through legal process rather than using informal requests for data correction or pressure on proxy services.


At 03:45 PM 10/9/2006 -0400, Marilyn Cade wrote:
Wendy, a question for you on this idea -- are you suggesting  such an option
would exist, unless there is a court order/or other legitimate legal
request? In that case, isn't the registry or registrar still required to
provide any information that they have, as a ISP would have to do?

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Wendy Seltzer
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 11:18 AM
To: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Changes to OPOC proposal: deletion instead of

I've made this alternate proposal for "correction" of data before,
but since we're sharing written suggestions for amendment, here's mine:

In lieu of having data corrected or revealed, registrant shall have
the option of allowing the domain name to lapse.  Where the
registrant requests the "lapse" option, the domain name shall be
stopped from resolving and registrant's identifying information shall
not be turned over to the requesting party.  Registrant may request
suspension pending resolution of the dispute in a "John Doe"
(anonymous) proceeding, or cancellation (where registrant does not
respond or challenge the request).  In either case, registrant's
information shall not be turned over.


-- 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