Response on IPC recommendations

[the UnderEmpire Council of Thirteen <theunderempire@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Sir/ Madam,


As co-admin of the underempire.net community, on whose behalf I write today,
I am writing to express our objections to the recommendations and comments
filed by the IPC as listed here:
http://forum.icann.org/lists/net-agreement-renewal/pdfTeYfTqqAOg.pdf



With our community being run and maintained by individuals, we specifically
object against the matter of releasing the information of domain registrants
to the public. As the owner of our domain is a private individual, this
recommendation would mean his home adress would be published, which goes
against laws such as the Data Protection Act 1998 (UK) that protects a
person's right to privacy with respect to processing of personal data.



In addition, the matter of copyright infringement is a responsibility of
companies to act upon. Should a case arise where someone uses the copyright
or intellectual property of a company with a disclaimer or their consent,
then the site operators should be sued in court by said company. Asking
Verisign to act upon the suspicion of copyright infringement with a uniform
rapid suspension (URS) system will create a shoot-first ask-later atmosphere
between providers and private individuals. Unlike what IPC claims in their
recommendations, this will harm both businesses and individuals.



As such, we ask you to disregard the recommendations of IPC completely.



Thank you.



Regards,



Vincent van Dam

Co-admin of the underempire.net community