RE: [ga] Whois Accuracy Study Launches

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

When I was on our wg looking into this; the only real concern I saw was Law 
enforcement, and a lady from RCMP and some fellow from Interpol, convinced me 
it was not a big deal for them.  They kind a leaned toward privacy, a warrant 
was no biggie and snooping was easy.
 
So the only redeeming (not really at all) value of this stuff goes to the IP 
dudettes and dudes.  And I never did get that deal where the IP bar was only on 
the side of big business, seems like the bar should cover both sides ----  oh 
yea that would be stupid $$$$$ wise.

--- On Thu, 6/11/09, Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [ga] Whois Accuracy Study Launches
To: "Karl Auerbach" <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 1:13 PM



Karl,

That's a common problem nowadays - independent studies ordered by
dependent parties.

Dominik


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Karl Auerbach
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:15 PM
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Debbie Garside
Subject: Re: [ga] Whois Accuracy Study Launches


kent wrote:

> That would be *enormously* more expensive, given the stringent
verification 
> methodology (from page 9):

It seems to me that those who are most demanding of this, the
intellectual property 
protection bar (of which I am a dues paying member), ought to pay for
this.

Those whose privacy is being busted by DNS whois ought not to be forced
to pay for a study 
that has as its ultimate goal a further reduction in their privacy
rights.

    --karl--