<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
CLOSING PUBLIC ACCESS TO WHOIS DATABASE
- To: "whois-comments-2007@xxxxxxxxx" <whois-comments-2007@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: CLOSING PUBLIC ACCESS TO WHOIS DATABASE
- From: "Burke, Michelle" <mburke@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:04:28 -0500
We understand that on October 31, 2007, ICANN's policy advisory body (the
Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council) will vote on three
motions that will determine the future structure of the domain name and Whois
system, as follows:
Motion 1 proposes a new 'Operational Point of Contact' (OPoC) - with undefined
legal responsibilities - to replace the current domain registration contacts.
The 'OPoC' proposal also limits the amount of publicly displayed domain name
ownership information.
Motion 2, proposes that ICANN conduct an objective and comprehensive study on
the legitimate abuses and uses of Whois data.
Motion 3 proposes eliminating all contractual obligations which require
registrars to display domain name ownership and contact details.
It is difficult to understand why ICANN would adopt either Motion 1 or Motion
2. Internet stakeholders, law enforcement agencies, and consumers rely on the
information available in its current form to permit them to confront domain
name holders who are violating the law, and their registration contracts, and
initiate ICANN arbitration proceedings. If ICANN removes this data from the
public domain, it would seem to me that the burden on the registrars would
increase exponentially -- since all complaints about a domain name would have
to be directed to the domain name registrar for forwarding to the domain name
registrant, or a process would have to be put in place whereby the registration
information would be disclosed on a case by case basis to those needing to
protect their rights against the bad faith registrant. It seems to me that
before making policy changes that may permanently alter the structure of the
domain name and Whois system, ICANN should adopt the second motion, and
thoroughly study whether there is any abuse that warrants the extreme actions
proposed in the first and second motion.
McDermott Will & Emery LLP | 227 W. Monroe Street, Chicago, IL 60606
Michelle C. Burke
IPMT
Telephone (Main Reception): 312.372.2000
Direct Line: 312.984.7761
Facsimile: 312.984.7700
*******************************************************************************************************************
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To comply with requirements imposed by the IRS, we
inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained herein (including any
attachments), unless specifically stated otherwise, is not intended or written
to be used, and cannot be used, for the purposes of (i) avoiding penalties
under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
another party any transaction or matter herein.
________________________________________________________________________________
This message is a PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL communication. This message and
all attachments are a private communication sent by a law firm and may be
confidential or protected by privilege. If you are not the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of
the information contained in or attached to this message is strictly
prohibited. Please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this
message, and then delete it from your system. Thank you.
*******************************************************************************************************************
Please visit http://www.mwe.com/ for more information about our Firm.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|