[dow2tf] further revision of draft recommendation re proxy services etc. :
Per the exchange below I have prepared (and attach) a second revision of the draft recommendation on this subject, incorporating the questions proposed by Kathy on May 6. Steve Metalitz ________________________________ From: owner-dow2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-dow2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Metalitz Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 10:30 AM To: Kathryn Kleiman; Jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; dow2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [dow2tf] RE: revision re proxy services and e-mail forwarding I think many of Kathy's concerns are addressed in the draft that Thomas has prepared for the summary of data collection on this topic. This can be found at http://does-not-exist.org/proxies.html. I believe that Jordyn volunteered to put together the various drafts produced by the three teams to summarize data collection and circulate that to us prior to yesterday's call. I think it would be useful to have all this material in front of us so that we have the broader context, as Kathy correctly points out would be helpful to readers of the preliminary report. The recommendations section should not have to do the work of other parts of the report. I have no problem with the additional questions Kathy suggests, though I note that some of them may be addressed by Thomas' summary, which reflects a lot of additional research on his part in addition to the minimal input we received from public and consittuency comments. Re the "local law" question, see my separate response from earlier today. Steve ________________________________ From: KathrynKL@xxxxxxx [mailto:KathrynKL@xxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM To: Steve Metalitz; Jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; dow2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: revision re proxy services and e-mail forwarding As promised, I am commenting on the proxy materials that Steve sent around. I hope others will do so as well. As an initial question. Jordyn mentioned today that Steve sent around something on local law. If so, I have not received it. Could someone kindly send me a copy? Thanks! Overview: I am a concerned that Steve's summary jumps into a complex subject at too high a level. It does not basic definitions and descriptions of proxy services, including the difference between a registrar and 3rd party proxy service. It would certainly help readers of our report to have some basic background and definitions in the area. It also not provide an overview of comments received to date. I think it is important for our report to include a summary of data gathered and comments submitted to date. We received several comments in the data gathering phase regarding rights to anonymous speech in countries with large numbers of domain name owners, and also concerns and recommendations for proxy services in constituency statements. In addition the Team 2 report was the first analysis of proxy contracts that I know of, and its results should definitely be shared (including, perhaps, as a preface for why we need more information). I assume the drafter of the proxy section (?) will be working with the full range of materials submitted to TF2 on proxy services. If there is some specific language you would like me to provide on the above points, please let me know. In addition, I have added a few additional questions (designated with a star) to the ones Steve listed. These are attached in a Word document. Thanks, Kathy Attachment:
Domain names ICANN whois tf 2 draft redline 2 re proxy services sjm 051404.doc |