RE: [gnso-whois-wg] A few questions

[<leo.longauer@xxxxxxx>]

Milton : There are existing circumstances where processes are put in
place at no additional charge incurred by the person requesting for
information. For instance, information about trademarks can be freely
accessed via the relevant national patent and trademark registries and
such information usually covers ownership, contact details, date of
registrations and other useful data. The process is easy, access is
unrestricted and there is a high degree of accuracy - all at no charge. 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ross Rader

>Cost was never an issue until the IP community 
>went completely overboard with this latest 
>round of demands. ...The registrar community 
>didn't propose the reveal function 
>this was completely a byproduct of 
>the IP community and this working group.

True, but remember that for the vast majority of legitimate purposes, an
OPOC'ed Whois record will suffice. 

When private parties need to go to the "reveal" stage, they are making
the registrar do manual work for private purposes. There needs to be a
payment for that extra work. This is justified both by its rationing
function (to avoid unnecessary use) and by its function of compensating
the registrars. 

Odd, no one suggests that the IPR lawyers who issue these demands for
information should not get paid for their work. 

But hey, I could be convinced to support elimination of all registrar
charges for processing these requests, if the trademark lawyers all
agree to offer their services indiscriminately to any comer without any
pay. 

That would be insane, but it least it would be a fairer type of
insanity. 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.12/910 - Release Date:
7/21/2007 3:52 PM