RE: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] missing recommendation in 7.1

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

The question Amr excerpts is answered by section 5.5 of our report.

From: owner-gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Amr Elsadr
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:59 PM
To: Rick Wesson
Cc: Avri Doria; Thick Whois
Subject: Re: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] missing recommendation in 7.1

Hi Rick,

On Sep 20, 2013, at 8:09 PM, Rick Wesson 
<rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:


Of course privacy is important, its just out of scope, not within our working 
groups remit. The reason we narrowly define working group charters is so that 
they can ignore bug problems and solve little ones.

This claim has come up several times over the course of the past year, and I 
have asked for an explanation to it every time it has come up. I am still 
confused about why the topic of privacy is considered out of the scope of this 
WG.

>From the WG Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/PDP/3.+WG+Charter>:

"Mission and Scope


The PDP Working Group is tasked to provide the GNSO Council with a policy 
recommendation regarding the use of 'thick' Whois by all gTLD Registries, both 
existing and future. As part of its deliberations on this issue, the PDP WG 
should, at a minimum, consider the following elements as detailed in the Final 
Issue Report: ...,

..., Impact on privacy and data protection: how would 'thick' Whois affect 
privacy and data protection, also taking into account the involvement of 
different jurisdictions with different laws and legislation with regard to data 
privacy as well as possible cross border transfers of registrant data?"

Thanks.

Amr