RE: [dow1-2tf] Last Call on Final Draft of Issues 1 and 2
- To: <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>, <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [dow1-2tf] Last Call on Final Draft of Issues 1 and 2
- From: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:51:22 -0500
- Cc: <dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
reading the document I have trouble understanding why you are asking
this. The first step says:
"Once receiving notification of an investigation, litigation,
regulatory proceeding or other government or civil action that might
affect its compliance with the RAA...."
Litigation is included.
>>> Marc Schneiders <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 11/24/2004 7:51:21 AM >>>
Since I came into the TF late and had little occasion to participate
in the drafting of this text, I should perhaps not now in the end
start bringing up new issues. I was just wondering whether the wording
does include cases, where a registrar gets sued by an individual or a
group (e.g. a consumer organization) for divulging private
information. A court could order a registrar to stop doing that for
specific whois entries. Even award damages. In the latter case, the
registrar might have to close down whois altogether to avoid
further claims. Does the step by step procedure cater for such
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, at 21:25 [=GMT-0500], Neuman, Jeff wrote:
> No, even in the US, we do not consider the "courts" as a "government
> agency." :)
> Is there a place in the document that you are looking at?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Schneiders [mailto:marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 6:35 PM
> To: Neuman, Jeff
> Cc: dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [dow1-2tf] Last Call on Final Draft of Issues 1 and 2
> Stupid question from a non-native English speaking European about
> the meaning of a word in the text on conflicts with national privacy
> Is a 'court of law' a 'government agency'?
> I would never, ever, include courts under government agencies. And
> judges in my country would hang me if I did (and we still had
> punishment, which we fortunately do not). But if this is normal in
> English, I have no problems. So just for clarification. Thanks.
> Marc Schneiders