Re: [gnso-dow123] FW: MarkMonitor's WHOIS Comments

[Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Despite this, the interactions I have had with those who supposedly 
support this document, have in fact turned out not to support this 
document. I have not contacted over 100 companies, nor will I, but in 
the small audit that I conducted, a clear majority of those listed as 
signatories, were in fact ignorant of the issues and not supportive of 
the MarkMonitor position.

I think its fine to accept the MarkMonitor submission at face value, but 
I would also like to ensure that the official record is clear that those 
listed as signatories are not necessarily supportive of the positions 
espoused and the number of signatures should not be given any weight in 
our, or ensuing, deliberations.

-ross

Metalitz, Steven wrote:
> fyi, in response to Ross's post yesterday
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Margie Milam [mailto:Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 1:00 PM
> To: Metalitz, Steven
> Subject: MarkMonitor's WHOIS Comments
>
>
>
> Steve,
>
>  
>
> I understand that a question has been raised regarding the MarkMonitor
> Comments to the WHOIS Taskforce Report.  
>
>  
>
> The MarkMonitor letter represents the collective perspective of over 100
> companies, non-profit groups and other organizations concerned about the
> impact of WHOIS policy on their ability to protect their customers.  We
> stand by these endorsements and wish to provide the WHOIS Task Force
> additional information regarding the process by which these endorsements
> were collected.  
>
>  
>
> We obtained the endorsements through an email communication that was
> sent primarily to our clients and to other organizations interested in
> the WHOIS issue.  The email contained a link to a website page
> describing MarkMonitor's Comments, and requested that the endorser enter
> their name, email address and Company if they supported the statements
> on behalf of their organization.    
>
>  
>
> Those who responded were sent a confirming email (to the email address
> they provided) with the following message:
>
>  
>
>  "Thank you for your rapid response in support of this important issue.
> We will include your company name in the letter we plan on submitting to
> ICANN early next week in favor of the Special Circumstances Proposal.
>
>  
>
> We are also publishing that letter on our web site at:
> http://www.markmonitor.com/openwhois/ in order to call attention to this
> important issue.  Please feel free to contact me at 415-278-8472
> (honni.marks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) or Margie Milam at 208-389-5750
> (margie.milam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) if you have any additional questions or
> concerns. Again, we appreciate your support and thank you for response."
>
>  
>
> We know that many of the endorsements resulted from consultation and
> coordination within the endorsing entities.   For example, in the case
> of the Anti-Phishing Working Group, this endorsement was made after a
> vote by its steering committee to endorse the MarkMonitor position.  
>
>  
>
> There were also a few endorsements that resulted after an article
> appeared in eweek.com regarding this issue  (see
> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2082346,00.asp
> <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2082346,00.asp>   ), which
> resulted in our updated posting on 1/15/07.   These endorsements were
> confirmed in the same manner as the email communications described
> above.
>
>  
>
> We are not aware of any concerns regarding the information provided,
> except for a Mozilla reference which was corrected last week to be an
> "individual" endorsement instead of a "corporate" endorsement.  In
> addition, yesterday we were informed that dot.berlin has reconsidered
> its prior endorsement.  
>
>  
>
> As you know, over the past few years ICANN has sought a broader scope of
> participation on major issues, including WHOIS issues. The participation
> by major corporations and non-profit organizations in this discussion
> through their endorsement of the MarkMonitor letter is in line with
> ICANN's efforts to seek greater participation, and should therefore be
> considered in the Task Force's analysis.        
>
>  
>
> If you have any further questions regarding our posting, please do not
> hesitate to contact me at (208) 389-5769.
>
>  
>
> Sincerely,
>
>  
>
> Margie Milam
>
> General Counsel
>
> MarkMonitor, Inc.
>
>