[alac] DRAFT -- priorities for whois-sc
Hello, there's another prioritization exercise currently going on in the GNSO, on WHOIS issues. A list of possible issues, extracted from the staff manager's report, is appended in the end of this e-mail. Here is a draft of the list of issues that Wendy and I would suggest to send to the GNSO secretariat and the WHOIS steering group as the ALAC's WHOIS priorities, along with some general remarks: >To: whois-sc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: ALAC top 5 > >The following whois issues are the ALAC's top five: > > * 1 -- data elements that are collected > * 3 -- should registrants be allowed not to provide some data? > * 4 -- pseudonymous registration > * 5 -- registrars' disclosures to registrants > * 7 -- consequences when registrant provides inaccurate data > >We think that the chief issues of concern to individual Internet >users regarding WHOIS involve the mandatory collection of data not >operationally necessary, the forced disclosure to the public of that >data, and disclosure to them about the data protection/use policies >of the registrars to whom they give such data. > >Because individuals use domain names to identify and locate >communications on the Internet, we think it is important that they >be able to do so without disclosing names or private information. > >We also re-iterate our earlier recommendation that the GNSO look at >how WHOIS can be made auditable, by letting data users identify >themselves, and the purpose for which they are accessing WHOIS data; >in particular if the steering group comes to the conclusion that a >tiered access model should be considered. We would have listed this >issue as one of our top 5, had it been identified in the staff >manager's report. Comments welcome. Regards, -- Thomas Roessler <roessler (at) does-not-exist.org> Issues Concerning Data Collection 1. Should the elements of data that registrars are required to collect at the time of registration of a domain name be revised? (See Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) § 3.2.) 2. Should registrars be prohibited by ICANN from collecting additional items of data? 3. Should all registrants, or certain classes of registrants (see Issue 18 below), be afforded the option of not providing some or all elements that registrars are required to collect and, if so, which elements? 4. Should the current mechanism for pseudonymous registration be changed or supplemented with one or more alternative mechanisms? (See RAA § 126.96.36.199.) Should steps be taken to encourage broader availability of this mechanism? 5. Are the current requirements that registrars make disclosures to, and obtain consent by, registrants concerning the uses of collected data adequate and appropriate? (See RAA §§ 188.8.131.52 to 184.108.40.206.) Issues Concerning Data Quality 6. Are the procedures currently followed by registrars adequate to promote accurate, complete, and up-to-date data, as required by both privacy and accountability principles? (See RAA §§ 220.127.116.11, 18.104.22.168, and 3.7.8, as well as the GNSOs Whois recommendations on accuracy adopted by the ICANN Board on 27 March 2003.) 7. What should be the consequences when a registrant provides inaccurate or incomplete data, or fails to correct inaccurate or incomplete data? (See RAA §§ 22.214.171.124, 126.96.36.199, and 3.7.8.) Are safeguards needed to prevent abusive reports of inaccuracies? Should certain classes of registrants (see Issue 18 below) be permitted to provide inaccurate or incomplete data? Issues Concerning Data Handling 8. Are the current requirements that registrars handle personal data according to the notices given at the time of registration, and in a manner that avoids loss, misuse, unauthorized access or disclosure, alteration, or destruction, adequate and appropriate? (See RAA §§ 188.8.131.52 and 184.108.40.206.) 9. Are the current requirements for handling of registrar data by registry operators adequate and appropriate? Issues Concerning Data Disclosure 10. Are the current means of query-based access appropriate? Should both web-based access and port-43 access be required? (RAA § 3.3.1.) 11. What are the purposes for providing public query-based access? Are the elements currently required to be disclosed in public query-based access adequate and appropriate? (RAA § 3.3.1.) 12. What measures, if any, should registrars and registry operators be permitted to take to limit data mining of Whois servers? 13. Should access to data be differentiated based on the party receiving access, or based on the use to which the data will be put? If so, how should differentiated access be implemented and how should the cost of differentiation be funded? 14. Should the current requirement that registrars provide bulk Whois access for non-marketing uses be further limited or eliminated? (RAA § 3.3.6, as well as the GNSOs Whois recommendations on accuracy adopted by the ICANN Board on 27 March 2003.) Issues Concerning Data Use 15. Which uses of Whois data by members of the public should be permitted (e.g., resolving technical problems, sourcing spam, identifying online merchants, law enforcement activities, identifying online infringers for enforcement of intellectual property rights, etc.)? Which uses should be prohibited? 16. How should restrictions on permissible uses by members of the public be enforced? (RAA §§ 220.127.116.11 to 18.104.22.168.) 17. To what extent is Whois data actually used to the harm of registrants (e.g., identity theft, spam, stalking, and other harassment)? Issues Concerning Classification of Registrants 18. Should certain types of registrants (e.g., those using domains for political and similar activities) be exempt from the usual requirements to provide data, or to have it available in Whois? How should the eligibility of particular registrants for these exemptions be determined? Are measures required to address the possibility of abuses in the classification procedure? Issues Concerning Commercial Confidentiality and Rights in Data 19. Should registrars have the option, independent of their customers, to protect the confidentiality of Whois data based on registrars proprietary rights to that data? Are the current provisions permitting registrars to claim proprietary rights in personal data about their customers appropriate? (RAA § 3.5.) 20. Should there be ICANN requirements limiting registrars' ability to sell or use Whois data, or other data collected about customers, for commercial purposes?