[gnso-whois-study] Whois study group -- category rankings
- To: "GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-whois-study@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-whois-study] Whois study group -- category rankings
- From: "Brendler, Beau" <Brenbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 13:57:22 -0400
>From Beau Brendler and Consumer Reports WebWatch
We believe all seven categories are worth further study. Here's how we
think they should be ranked in order of priority:
1. (5) Impact of WHOIS data protection on crime and abuse.
2. (7) WHOIS data accuracy.
3. (1) WHOIS misuse.
4. (4) Demand and motivation for use of privacy services.
5. (2) Compliance with data protection laws/registrar accreditation
6. Proxy registrar compliance with law enforcement/dispute resolution
7. (3) Availability of privacy services.
WebWatch's perspective on WHOIS could be almost characterized as similar
to that of law enforcement or the FTC. Oversimply stated, we are
interested in seeing a compromise that would allow a consumer to use
accurate WHOIS data to help determine the credibility of a Web site with
which the consumer is about to do business, while not compromising, say,
the right of Burmese citizens to create Web sites to describe the
conditions within their country without fear of being tracked down and
harmed by their government via WHOIS data.
I will also ask the ALAC to weigh in and report back offline with any
additional information. The north American region seems to have the
strongest feelings on this issue.