Re: [council] Motion re Study on WHOIS Misuse

[Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Two questions: Why do we need so much detail in the Whereas clauses?  I 
don't believe that's necessary or helpful.
Second, I do not believe that we have enough detail in the Resolved, or 
the staff report to which it refers, to be confident that the Misuse 
Study would be a statistically or scientifically valid study.
Even the staff report still indicates  "However, even that [superior] 
proposal did not address key challenges that could diminish the WHOIS 
policy contributions afforded by this study – notably, determining the 
"significance" of misuse and proving a causal relationship between 
misuse reduction and WHOIS anti-harvesting measures. If ICANN and GNSO 
elect to pursue this study, these concerns should be discussed with the 
bidder before a contract is awarded."
Who would be responsible for the "concerns should be discussed"?  I 
think that question remains at the GNSO level.

I am therefore planning to vote against this resolution.

Thanks,
--Wendy


On 07/13/2010 11:51 AM, Terry L Davis, P.E. wrote:
> Mike
>
>
>
> I didn't that anyone else seconded your motion.  If there is no second
> still, I second this motion.
>
>
>
> Take care
>
> Terry
>
>
>
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 6:52 PM
> To: 'GNSO Council'
> Subject: [council] Motion re Study on WHOIS Misuse
>
>
>
> I submit the attached motion (copied also below) for consideration by the
> Council at our meeting next week.
>
>
>
> Would appreciate a second, and am happy to answer any questions.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
>
> RODENBAUGH LAW
>
> tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
>
> http://rodenbaugh.com<http://rodenbaugh.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
> GNSO Council motion to pursue study of Whois Misuse.
>
> Whereas:
>
> In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive and
> objective understanding of key factual issues  regarding the gTLD Whois
> system would benefit future GNSO policy development efforts (
> <http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/>  http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/).
>
> Before defining the details of these studies, the Council solicited
> suggestions from the community for specific topics of study on WHOIS.
> Suggestions were submitted (
> <http://forum.icann.org/lists/WHOIS-comments-2008/>
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/WHOIS-comments-2008/) and ICANN staff prepared
> a  'Report on Public Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS', dated
> 25-Feb-2008 (
> <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/Whois-privacy/Whois-study-suggestion-report-25
> feb08.pdf>
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/Whois-privacy/Whois-study-suggestion-report-25f
> eb08.pdf).
>
> On 28-Mar-2008 the GNSO Council resolved to form a WHOIS Study Working Group
> to develop a proposed list, if any, of recommended studies for which ICANN
> staff would be asked to provide cost estimates to the Council (
> <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-27mar08.shtml>
> http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-27mar08.shtml).
>
> The WHOIS Study WG did not reach consensus regarding further studies, and on
> 25-Jun-2008 the GNSO Council resolved to form another group of volunteers
> (WHOIS Hypotheses WG) to review the 'Report on Public Suggestions on Further
> Studies of WHOIS' and the GAC letter on WHOIS studies. (
> <http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf>
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf).
>
> This WG was tasked to prepare a list of hypotheses to be tested, and
> reported to the Council on 26-Aug-2008.
> (https://st.icann.org/Whois-hypoth-wg/index.cgi?whois_hypotheses_wg#Whois_st
> udy_hypotheses_wg_final_report ).
>
> On 5-Nov-2008, the Council convened a volunteer group of Councilors and
> interested constituency members to draft a resolution regarding studies, if
> any, for which cost estimates should be obtained.  The Whois Study Drafting
> Team further consolidated studies and data requested by the GAC (
> <http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf>
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf ).
>
>
>
> For each of the consolidated studies, constituencies were invited to assign
> priority rank and assess feasibility.  5 constituencies provided the
> requested rankings, while 2 constituencies (NCUC and Registrars) indicated
> that no further studies were justified.  The GAC was also invited to assign
> priorities, but no reply was received.  The Drafting Team determined that
> the six studies with the highest average priority scores should be the
> subject of further research to determine feasibility and obtain cost
> estimates.
>
> On 04-Mar-2009, Council requested Staff to conduct research on feasibility
> and cost estimates for selected Whois studies and report its findings to
> Council.  (See Motion 3 at
> <https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?04_mar_2009_motions>
> https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?04_mar_2009_motions).
>
>
>
> On 23-Mar-2010, Staff presented its latest report on feasibility and cost
> estimates for Whois Studies. (
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.
> pdf) This report included a Staff Analysis and Recommendations for the first
> study, regarding WHOIS Misuse.   The WHOIS Misuse study addressed 3
> originally requested studies (1, 14, and 21) and GAC data set 2.   The
> hypothesis of the WHOIS Misuse study is: "Public access to WHOIS data is
> responsible for a material number of cases of misuse that have caused harm
> to natural persons whose registrations do not have a commercial purpose."
>
>
> At ICANN's meeting in Brussels, representatives of the GAC reiterated their
> interest in ICANN's response to the GAC letter of Apr-2008, which included
> these requests for further studies of WHOIS (
> <http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf>
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf), stating:
>
>
>
>
> First and foremost, the GAC believes that studies of WHOIS gTLD data should
> be undertaken by neutral third parties and should create a factual record
> that documents the uses and abuses of WHOIS data recognized by the GAC WHOIS
> Principles. The goal should be to initially compile data that provides a
> documented evidence base regarding:
>
>
>
> .  the amount and source of traffic accessing WHOIS servers and the types
> and numbers of different groups of users and what those users are using
> WHOIS data for; and
>
>
>
> .  the types and extent of misuses of WHOIS data and what harm is caused by
> each type of misuse, including economic, use of WHOIS data in SPAM
> generation, abuse of personal data, loss of reputation or identity theft,
> security costs and loss of data."
>
>
>
> The Affirmation of Commitments requires that ICANN conduct reviews of WHOIS
> policy and implementation "to assess the extent to which WHOIS policy is
> effective and its implementation meets the legitimate needs of law
> enforcement and promotes consumer trust."  The first such review must be
> organized by 30-Sep-2010.  (
> <http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm
> >
> http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm)
>
>
>
> The proposed budget for FY 2011 includes at least $450,000 for WHOIS
> studies.
>
>
>
> Resolved:
>
> Council requests ICANN staff to proceed with the WHOIS Misuse Study, as
> described in Staff's 23-Mar-2010 Report, using the vendor selection process
> described in Annex of that same report. (
> <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en
> .pdf>
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.
> pdf).

--
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
phone: +1.914.374.0613
Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
http://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/