[dow2tf] Magnolia Mansourkia's contribution to tf2 text version

["GNSO SECRETARIAT" <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

RESEND: Posted on behalf of	Magnolia Mansourkia     originally sent on:
Envoye :
> vendredi 7 mai 2004 23:54
>
> > Objet :	RE: Contribution to TF Outline
> > All-
> > 	Sorry for the delay.  Attached are the outline sections I agreed to
> > begin drafting, for your review and edit.
> > 	Have a good weekend,
> > 	Maggie
Please find text version:
> 		GNSO SECRETARIAT

1.	INTRODUCTION

[To be inserted]

1.1	Previous Discussion

[To be inserted]

1.2	Genesis of the Task Force


1.3	Terms of Reference
The purpose of this task force is to determine:
a) What the best way is to inform registrants of what information about
themselves is made publicly available when they register a domain name and
what options they have to restrict access to that data and receive
notification of its use?

b) What changes, if any, should be made in the data elements about
registrants that must be collected at the time of registration to achieve an
acceptable balance between the interests of those seeking contact-ability,
and those seeking privacy protections?

c) Should domain name holders be allowed to remove certain parts of the
required contact information from anonymous (public) access, and if so, what
data elements can be withdrawn from public access, by which registrants, and
what contractual changes (if any) are required to enable this? Should
registrars be required to notify domain name holders when the withheld data
is released to third parties?
If registrants have the ability to withhold data from public anonymous
access, will this increase user incentive to keep the contact information
they supply current and accurate.

To ensure that the task force remains focused and that its goal is
achievable and within a reasonable time frame, it is necessary to be clear
on what is out of scope for the task force.

Out-of-scope:

The task force should not examine the mechanisms available for anonymous
public access of the data - this is the subject of a separate task force.

The task force should not examine mechanisms for law enforcement access to
the data collected. This is generally subject to varying local laws, and may
be the subject of a future task force.

The task force should not study new methods or policies for ensuring the
accuracy of the required data, as this will be subject of a separate task
force.

The task force should not consider issues regarding registrars' ability to
use Whois data for their own marketing purposes, or their claims of
proprietary rights to customers' personal data.

1.4	Overview of Recommendations

The task force discussions and ensuing recommendations focus on our attempt
to balance the needs and rights of registrants to keep their personal
information from wrongful access and misappropriation while enabling
legitimate uses of the data elements and respecting the needs of those
requesting access to the data.

Some changes to current Whois policy that make up the final recommendation
are as follows:

·	More conspicuous notice to registrants by registrars, at the point of
registration, of the possible uses of Whois data.
·	More conspicuous notice and clarifications to registrants by registrars,
at the point of registration, as to the process by which registrant data
will be shared.
·	The principle of tiered access to Whois data elements is accepted, subject
to reaching consensus on viability, balance of interests and financial
feasibility.
·	Uniform implementation of Whois policy by all registrars.
·	Registrars should not have to violate local data protection laws in order
to conform with Whois policy.  If there is a conflict of law and Whois
policy, a process should be in place to allow for registrars to show such
conflict and detail the change needed for it to conform to the respective
local laws.


2.	FINDINGS ON EACH ISSUE


Notification and Consent

According to the ICANN Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA), Registrars
are required to form an agreement with Registered Name Holders containing
the following elements.

Section 3.7.7 of the RAA addresses the requirements of the
Registrar/Registrant agreement, including the need for accurate and reliable
registrant contact information.
To the extent the notice to registrants of data elements collected and
displayed are not clear or may be overlooked by registrants based on the
overall length and complexity of the registration agreement, it is useful to
change the format so that better notice is delivered to registrants.  The
task force finds that disclosures regarding availability and access to Whois
data should be set aside from other provisions of a registration agreement
by way of bigger or bolded font, a highlighted section, simplified language
or otherwise made more conspicuous.

It follows that separate consent to the Whois disclosures is also useful.
By obtaining separate consent from registrants, at the time of agreement, to
the specific Whois data provisions, it would further draw attention to and
facilitate better understanding of the registrar?s Whois disclosure policy.


Proxy Registrations

[To be inserted.]

Local Law

[To be inserted.]

Collectio of Data

[To be inserted.]

3.	RECOMMENDATIONS

4.	OTHER ISSUES

[Any identified?]

5.	IMPACT OF RECOMMENDATIONS

[Probably not added until final report.]

6.	OUTREACH EFFORTS

6.1 Public comments on terms and conditions

[To be inserted.]

6.2  Data gathering process

[To be inserted.]

7.	TASK FORCE VOTE

[To be inserted.]