ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[whois-services-comments]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Comments to the Preliminary Task Force Report on WHOIS Services (the "Report")

  • To: <whois-services-comments@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Comments to the Preliminary Task Force Report on WHOIS Services (the "Report")
  • From: "Margie Milam" <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:19:59 -0700

Dear Task Force Members:

 

The organizations identified below join MarkMonitor in submitting
comments to the two new WHOIS proposals described in the Report.

 

Introduction

 

Billions of Internet users benefit from the protection enabled by
current WHOIS policy, which requires free, unrestricted and immediate
access. If ICANN policy creates new obstacles or delays for those
seeking to protect consumers from illegal activity involving domain
names, Internet users will suffer. Thwarting the current and successful
process will profoundly increase the number innocent consumers made
victims by Internet criminals.

 

The undersigned ask the WHOIS Task Force to recognize that brand owners
are most often first to respond to online illegal activity and that they
rely almost exclusively on WHOIS to identify and stop the persons behind
such illegal conduct. Identification is critical-it helps parties
communicate and speed dispute resolution without legal action, and when
such action is necessary, enables service of process, without which the
legitimate rule of law cannot provide a safe environment for consumers
and businesses on the Internet.

 

While many legitimate and important privacy concerns exist over access
to WHOIS data (for example, registration data of a battered women's
shelter site) many others seek anonymity as a cover for nefarious intent
like cyber squatting, phishing and other for profit illegitimate
behavior. While those with ill-intent profit from anonymity, consumers
and legitimate online commerce suffer, often unknowingly. We request
that ICANN evaluate models that offer protection from those who seek to
abuse the system while making decisions related to blocking access to
WHOIS data.

 

We therefore ask that ICANN and the WHOIS Task Force act on the behalf
of Internet users and consumers to preserve the collective trust
instilled in the Internet. We request that any new policies be examined
by the WHOIS Task Force in light of their impact on consumers and those
seeking to maintain and protect the safety and reliability of electronic
commerce.

 

To preserve order and maintain a sense of security and accountability
for Internet users, we recommend the adoption of the Special
Circumstances proposal.

 

Evaluation of Proposals

I. The Operational Point of Contact (OPOC) Proposal

 

The OPOC proposal is troubling for a number of reasons. First, it
reduces the amount of information available in investigating instances
of online abuse. Brand owners often rely on the various fields in WHOIS
to track down cybersquatters and fraudsters. Reducing the amount of such
information will likely cause delays for brand owners in identifying and
commencing action against registrants who engage in illegal conduct.

 

The OPOC proposal does not specify the qualifications, responsibilities,
and standards to be applicable to the OPOC. For example, it is unclear
whether the OPOC would be able to accept service of process for legal
actions involving domain names, such as the UDRP. Under the proposal,
the OPOC could be a party with no relationship to the actual registrant.
Since the OPOC can be a third party (such as a proxy service or even a
registrar), there is no assurance that important communications will be
promptly forwarded to the registrant. Thus, cease & desist letters,
domain transfer approvals, notices of inaccurate WHOIS information,
phishing take-down notices, UDRP complaints and other similar
communications may not be received and processed in a prompt manner.

 

In addition, the OPOC proposal does not address the privacy concerns
that have been raised as the primary reason for changing WHOIS policy.
Without such improvements in privacy, it is difficult to justify the
adoption of OPOC over the status quo.

 

II. Special Circumstances Proposal

 

The Special Circumstances proposal is preferable to the OPOC proposal
because it provides a workable solution to the privacy concerns without
significantly changing WHOIS for the vast majority of Internet users.

 

The impact to brand owners should be minimal under the Special
Circumstances proposal because registrants who misuse domain names to
conduct illegal online activities should not qualify for the "special
circumstances designation" and therefore would continue to have their
contact information displayed in the same manner as currently available
today. The Special Circumstance proposal includes a practical mechanism
that allows the WHOIS information to be revealed in the event the
privacy designation is abused, or the domain name is used for commercial
purposes.

 

Thus, under the Special Circumstances proposal, brand owners would not
need to significantly alter their current processes and procedures for
monitoring, tracking and taking action against those illegally targeting
their businesses and consumers.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Irfan Salim

President and CEO

MarkMonitor, Inc.

San Francisco, California, USA




 

Co-signed by:

 




Abbott Laboratories

Abbott Park, IL USA

 

Activision Inc.

Santa Monica, CA USA

 

Acushnet Company

Fairhaven, MA USA

 

Advanced Micro Devices

Sunnyvale, CA USA

 

Alliance Data

Dallas, TX USA

 

ALLTEL Communications Corp.

Sandusky, OH USA

 

Anti-Phishing Working Group

San Francisco, CA USA

 

Apple Computer

Cupertino, CA USA

 

Avaya Inc.  

Basking Ridge, NJ USA

 

Bank of America

Charlotte, NC USA

 

BBC

London, ENGLAND

 

Bell Canada International

Montreal, PQ CANADA

 

Booz Allen Hamilton

Mclean, VA USA



Bose Corporation

Framingham, MA USA

 

British Sky Broadcasting

London, ENGLAND

 

Boy Scouts of America

Newark, NJ USA

 

Canadian Broadcasting Corp.

Ottawa ON CANADA

 

Capmark Financial Group Inc.

Harsham, PA USA

 

Carfax Inc.

Fairfax, VA USA

 

CarMax Business Services 

Richmond, VA USA

 

Carnival Corporation

Miami, FL USA




Caterpillar Inc.

Peoria, IL USA

 

Cingular Wireless

Atlanta, GA USA

 

CIT 

New York, NY USA

 

CMS Energy

Jackson, MI USA



Coldwater Creek

Sandpoint, ID USA

 

Comerica

Detroit, MI USA

 

Conair Corp.

East Windsor, NJ USA

 

Consumers Energy

Jackson, MI USA

 

Coors Global Properties, Inc.

Golden, CO USA

 

Dell, Inc.

Round Rock, TX USA

 

Delta Airlines

Atlanta, GA USA




 

Doctor's Associates Inc.

Milford, CT USA

 

Dole Food Companies Inc.

Westlake Village, CA USA

 

dotBERLIN GmbH & Co. KG

Berlin, GERMANY

 

eBay Inc.

San Jose, CA USA

 

E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.

Wilmington, DE USA

 

EMCOR Group

London, ENGLAND

 

First Data Corporation

Greenwood Village, CO USA

 

Fontainebleau Resorts

Las Vegas, NV USA

 

Forbes Media LLC

New York, NY USA

 

Ford Motor Company 

Dearborn, MI USA

 

Franklin Templeton Invest.

San Mateo, CA USA

 

Garmin

Olathe, KS USA

 

General Motors Corporation

Detroit, MI USA

 

Hasbro Inc.

Pawtucket, RI USA

 

Hilton Hotels Corporation

Beverly Hills, CA USA

 

HouseValues Inc.

Kirkland, WA USA

 

IBM 

Armonk, NY USA

 

InfoSpace Inc.

Bellevue, WA USA

 

Integis

Charlotte, NC USA

 

InterContinental Hotels Group

Windsor, ENGLAND

 

International Data Group

Boston, MA USA

 

Kelly Services

Troy, MI USA

 

Knowledge Adventure

Schiller Park, IL USA

 

Lastminute.com

London, ENGLAND

 

Live Nation

Beverly Hills, CA USA

 

Logitech Inc

Romanel-sur-Morges Caud
SWITZERLAND

 

Lumenis

Santa Clara, CA USA

 

Mercer Human Resource
Consulting

New York, NY USA

 

Microsoft

Redmond, WA USA

 

Molson Canada

Montreal, PQ CANADA

 

Morton's The Steakhouse

Chicago, IL USA

 

Mozilla

Mountain View, CA USA

 

NetJets

Woodbridge, NJ USA

 

News America Incorporated

New York, NY USA

 

Nordstrom Inc.

Seattle, WA USA




Novell Inc.

Waltham, MA USA

 

Optimo.com

San Leandro, CA USA

 

Overstock.com Inc.

Salt Lake City, UT USA

 

PACCAR Inc.

Bellevue, WA USA

 

Paypal Inc.

San Jose, CA USA

 

PerkinElmer

Wellesley, MA USA

 

PetSmart Inc.

Phoenix, AZ USA

 

Priceline.com

Norwalk, CA USA

 

Quiksilver

Huntington Beach, CA USA

 

Raymond James Financial

St. Petersburg, FL USA

 

Renold plc

Manchester, ENGLAND

 

Reviews.com

New York, NY USA

 

RevollvingDoorSlammers.net

Jabiru, Australia

 

Saint-Gobain

London, ENGLAND

 

SB Management Services Inc.

USA

 

Sherwin-Williams Co.

Cleveland, OH USA

 

Shimano

Sakai, Osaka JAPAN

 

Shopping Inc.

Brisnane, CA USA

 

Silverpop Systems

Atlanta, GA USA

 

Snap-on Inc et al

Kenosha, WI USA

 

State Farm

Bloomington, IL USA

 

T. Rowe Price

Baltimore, MD USA

 

Tahitian Noni International

Provo, UT USA

 

Terex Corporation

Westport, CT USA

 

The Body Shop International

Littlehampton, ENGLAND

 

The Clearing House

New York, NY USA

 

The Cobalt Group Inc.

Seattle, WA USA




The Dial Corporation

Scottsdale, AZ USA

 

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Amherst, NY USA

 

The Saul Zaentz Company

Berkely, CA USA

 

The Scotts Company LLC

Marysville, OH USA

 

Visa International

Foster City, CA USA

 

W.L. Gore & Associates Inc.

Putzburnn, Bayern GERMANY

 

Warner Bros. Entertainment 

Burbank, CA USA

 

Washington Mutual Inc.

Seattle, WA USA

 

Watson Pharmaceuticals

Corona, CA USA

 

WebHostingBuzz.com

Wilmington, DE USA

 

Wells Fargo

San Francisco, CA USA

 

Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company

Chicago, IL USA

 

Yahoo! Inc.

Sunnyvale, CA USA

 

Young Life

Colorado Springs, CO USA

 

Zurich Insurance Company

Zurich SWITZERLAND




Attachment: ICANN round 2 final letter.pdf
Description: ICANN round 2 final letter.pdf



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy