Re: [dow1tf] Amendments to Preliminary Report #1

["Antonio Harris" <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with David's comments. Actually I am
comfortable with the "existing language".

Tony Harris
ISPCP Constituency

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Fares" <dfares@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <dow1tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>; "Milton Mueller"
<mueller@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 6:13 PM
Subject: Re: [dow1tf] Amendments to Preliminary Report #1


> Thanks to Milton for starting an email dialogue.
>
> I am concerned that Milton's proposal prejudges our own going
> debate as to the definition of a legitimate user, which I would argue
> goes beyond users accessing whois for technical reasons.
>
> More generally, I disagree that international documents related to the
> "free flow of information" do not address personal contact data.  The
> OECD Guidelines specifically reference balancing privacy protection
> and the free flow of information.  I will try to provide some revised
text.
> I also think that it would be helpful to cite the OECD Guidelines.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>
>
> Date sent:      Sun, 09 May 2004 11:07:29 -0400
> From:           "Milton Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx>
> To:             <dow1tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject:        [dow1tf] Amendments to Preliminary Report #1
>
> >
> > As we near completion we should make more use of the list.
> > Teleconferences are better for discussion, but email is better for
> > nailing down wordings.
> >
> > I have gone more carefully through Jeff's draft and propose
> > the following change in the section entitled "Principles for
> > the use of Whois."
> >
> > Existing language:
> > "Whois TF 1's goal was to strike a balance among concerns and needs of
> > the different stakeholders related to accuracy, reliability, access
> > and privacy issues and to ensure that whatever process we developed
> > did not prevent the free flow of information."
> >
> > This language is a bit vague and potentially troublesome. There is no
> > way we can speak of "not preventing the free flow of information" when
> > the whole purpose of this task force is indeed to restrict some
> > parties' access to information. Besides, there are bad overtones to
> > this choice of words. In international treaties and policy, "free flow
> > of information" does not mean personal contact data but news,
> > scientific knowledge, opinion, culture and the like.
> >
> > Here is my proposed new language. It is also cleaner grammatically:
> >
> > "Whois TF 1's goal was to balance the concerns and needs of domain
> > name registrants, legitimate whois data users, registrars and
> > registries. We recognize the need to take into account issues of
> > privacy and data protection, data accuracy, registrant accountability,
> > and system burdens. We also recognized the need to ensure that
> > whatever process we developed must not prevent exchanges of
> > information needed to make the DNS as a technical system operate
> > smoothly and efficiently."
> >
> > Hope this is acceptable to all.
> >
> > --MM
> >
> >
>
> David A. Fares
> Director, Electronic Commerce
> U.S. Council for International Business
> dfares@xxxxxxxxx
> Tel: 212-703-5061
>      212-354-4480
> Fax: 212-575-0327
>