Re: [council] Proposed simplified WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006
I think it would be politically useful if this motion contained a reference to the other motion (formerly clause 3) that you removed from this for scope purposes. It need only be referential and something along the lines of "The GNSO Council will undertake the implementation of an additional work plan designed to better understand the needs of governments, via the GAC, related to the development of an understandable definition of the minimum purposes...etc.." The reason for this would be to ensure that our intent regarding these initiatives remains very clear: i.e. that we are still committed to working to understand the broad range of issues, resolving outstanding existing Whois policy questions, etc. regardless of what definition of scope they fall under. Bootstrapping this work inside this motion will help those following along from home better understand our work by providing clear line of sight to the additional work items this ongoing discussion has spawned. My fear is that simply dropping this language entirely without explanation may be unduly confusing for anyone but the insiders. Any steps we can take to share a clear plan forward with our stakeholders and other concerned and interested parties will definitely make our job easier in the coming months. (3) The Council will undertake a dialogue with governments, > via the GAC, to work towards developing a broadly > understandable definition of the minimum purposes for which > the current data required in the Registrar Accreditation > Agreement (see clause 3.4 of > http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm ), as listed > below, is collected and retained. The dialogue should seek > to balance > privacy and law enforcement concerns with ICANN's mission and > core values, and must take into account the views of law > enforcement agencies, data protection authorities, the > policies and rules of access to ccTLD data, and relevant > national laws. > > Note that one of the purposes would be for the public display > of some or all of the data as per the recent definition of > the purpose of WHOIS. > Note that Registrars are required (clause 3.7.7.4) to provide > notice to each new or renewed Registered Name Holder stating > the purposes for which any Personal Data collected from the > applicant are intended, and the intended recipients or > categories of recipients of the data (including the Registry > Operator and others who will receive the data from Registry Operator). Bruce Tonkin wrote: Hello All, Regards, -- -ross rader
general manager,
domain direct/netidentity/nameplanetHave you checked out the NetIdentity/Nameplanet Weblog? http://netidentity.weblog.info
|