ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


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

[council] Response to request from GNSO Council for follow up information on WHOIS studies

  • To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] Response to request from GNSO Council for follow up information on WHOIS studies
  • From: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 17:59:38 -0700
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Acceptlanguage: en-US
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcrVJG5meM1DZKblQQOPWhOuY5pLeQ==
  • Thread-topic: Response to request from GNSO Council for follow up information on WHOIS studies

All,

On the GNSO Council's 1 April 2010 call, Council members began to discuss 
staff's recent report analyzing information gathered to-date on proposed 
studies of WHOIS. That report is posted here: 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.pdf 
, summarized by slides: 
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/whois-studies-presentation-01apr10-en.pdf.

On the call, Council members suggested that it would be helpful to identify the 
WHOIS policy issues that each proposed study is intended to inform.  
Recognizing that there is a long history of debate, Council members also wanted 
to understand better the nature of the concerns and viewpoints about these 
studies that have been expressed to-date.  The following is an initial response 
to that request.  Most of the content was extracted from the original study 
proposals themselves, since study proposers were asked to specifically state 
the "utility" of each study being proposed. That means that the ideas stated 
are often in the words of the study proponents and may not be considered 
"neutral".  Some additional ideas were gleaned from past council and working 
group discussions.  While I'm at it, in the attached I also offer some thoughts 
and insights shared by others on the potential policy "relevance" of other 
pending WHOIS studies.  It might be helpful to mention that as I assembled this 
list I noticed that the list includes many things we might learn; it is less 
expansive on precisely how policies might change.  It also might be worthwhile 
for the Council to talk more about that in your upcoming discussion.

Note that I did not wade into speculating on who the likely proponents or 
critics of various studies would be.  I tried to extract ideas that have been 
stated already and I would encourage the Council members to offer the views of 
their stakeholder groups and constituencies, including amplifying, clarifying 
or correcting anything I've included in this document.

Note: This is a working document and does not constitute or reflect the views 
of ICANN on any pending or proposed WHOIS study.

Thanks, Liz

Liz Gasster
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN

Attachment: Response to GNSO requested 1 April 2010 on WHOIS Studies.doc
Description: Response to GNSO requested 1 April 2010 on WHOIS Studies.doc



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