RE: Broader Opt-Out (was Re: [gnso-dow123] Alternative proposal re Whois)

["Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the suggestion Jordyn. I think that minor wording change
would have a huge impact and would probably defeat the purpose of the
proposal, which is to move toward a more objective standard for
determining the circumstances under  which an exception should be
recognized to the rule that accurate and complete contact information
should be made available to the public.   People who don't have an
objective basis for their concern, but who simply feel that "Whois
represents an invasion of their privacy," should probably be encouraged
to use some other means of establishing an online presence that does not
involve registering a second level domain in a gTLD.  However, I will
circulate this suggestion (and your other one) to others involved in
formulating this proposal and see what might be taken on board.   
 
Steve   

________________________________

From: Jordyn Buchanan [mailto:jordyn.buchanan@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:39 AM
To: Metalitz, Steven
Cc: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Broader Opt-Out (was Re: [gnso-dow123] Alternative proposal re
Whois)


Hi Steve:

One possible change that I've been thinking about for your proposal is
to significantly broaden the circumstances under which one can opt out
of Whois.  Thinking about some discussions I've had with individual
domain registrants, many of them do not have specific reasons to think
that the presence of their information might have bad consequences, but
nonetheless they feel that Whois represents an invasion of their
privacy.  As a result, some of them resort to providing false
information in order to provide some sense of privacy. 

Perhaps a reasonable way to accomodate this concern is to change the
criteria under which the "special circumstances" opt out is available.
It may be possible to accomplish just by replacing an OR for an AND in
the current proposal.  Specifically, the paragraph that currently reads:


The "special circumstances" option would be open only to individual
registrants who will use the domain name for non-commercial purposes and
who can demonstrate that they have a reasonable basis for concern that
public access to data about themselves (e.g., name, address, e-mail
address, telephone number) that would otherwise be publicly displayed in
Whois would jeopardize a concrete and real interest in their personal
safety or security that cannot be protected other than by suppressing
that public access.  Social service agency providers serving such
individuals (e.g., abused women's shelters) could also apply.  

would change to:

The "special circumstances" option would be open only to individual
registrants who will use the domain name for non-commercial purposes OR
entities that can demonstrate that they have a reasonable basis for
concern that public access to data about themselves (e.g., name,
address, e-mail address, telephone number) that would otherwise be
publicly displayed in Whois would jeopardize a concrete and real
interest in their personal safety or security that cannot be protected
other than by suppressing that public access.  Social service agency
providers serving such individuals (e.g., abused women's shelters) could
also apply.  

This change would allow individuals not using the domain for commercial
purposes to have a reasonable privacy option and would also extend.
Presumably, there would need to be some mechanism to deactivate the
opt-out if the use of the domain changed, or if the domain were used for
bad purposes (more on this idea soon). 

Jordyn


On 10/30/06, Metalitz, Steven <met@xxxxxxx> wrote: 

        I had hoped to be able to improve the proposal with comments
from other
        task force members, but since these do not seem to have
materialized, I
        will aim to put this in final form this week.
        
        Steve
        
        -----Original Message----- 
        From: Ross Rader [mailto:ross@xxxxxxxxxx]
        Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 8:56 PM
        To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
        Cc: Metalitz, Steven; gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Alternative proposal re Whois
        
        Resent - not sure if it was sent/received last time around.
        
        Ross Rader wrote:
        > When do you expect this proposal to move to a more finished
state? 
        >
        > Metalitz, Steven wrote:
        >>  Attached please find an alternative proposal on Whois which
I hope
        >> the TF can consider.  It is the result of discussions among
members
        >> of the IPC and other constituencies and is a working draft,
based 
        >> largely on the model used for several years in the Dutch
ccTLD, .NL.
        
        >> I would be glad to take a few minutes on today's call to
present it
        >> and will ask that it be discussed in more detail on our next
call. I 
        >> look forward to your comments and suggestions and would note
again
        >> that this is intended as a working draft, not a final
product.
        >> Steve Metalitz
        >>
        >>
        >