[registrars] FW: [ipc-members] Whois policy development: IPC suggested priority list

["Elana Broitman" <ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Registrars - please see the list of issues that the IPC is proposing to the Whois Steering Group
 

Elana Broitman 
Register.com 
575 Eighth Avenue 
New York, NY 10018 
Phone (212) 798-9215 
Fax   (212) 629-9309 
ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx 

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Metalitz [mailto:metalitz@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 12:40 PM
To: Steve Metalitz; 'ipc-members@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [ipc-members] Whois policy development: IPC suggested priority list 


  

Sept. 9, 2003

 Fellow IPC Members,

 I write to seek your input for an exercise in setting priorities for ICANN policy development activities in the area of Whois data and privacy.  

 The GNSO Council has established a Whois/Privacy Steering Group with representation from all GNSO constituencies (as well as a number of observers).  IPC is represented on this Steering Group by Kiyoshi Tsuru (IPC Vice President) and myself.  

 The Steering Group's main task is to recommend priorities for policy development and to draft terms of reference for one or more task forces that would be set up by the GNSO Council.  The Steering Group is to draw from several sources, but chiefly the Issues Report prepared by ICANN staff last spring.  

 The Issues Report (see  ( http://www.icann.org/gnso/issue-reports/whois-privacy-report-13may03.htm) contained a list of 20 issue areas that the ICANN staff identified as potential fields for ICANN policy development.  The chair of the Steering Group, Bruce Tonkin, has asked each constituency to identify five of these 20 as its leading priorities.  While issue areas not listed in the Issues Report are not ruled out as the subjects of ICANN policy development activities, this exercise is the first step in setting priorities. 

 Kiyoshi and I have compiled the list below, based on our evaluation about the areas where the possibilities are greatest for progress on these sometimes contentious issues. It has been reviewed by the IPC officers and GNSO Council representatives.  We recommend that this list be put forward as the IPC's contribution to this discussion.  We would accompany this with a short statement indicating the IPC's concern that there needs to be better compliance with the existing Whois policies embodied in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) and other ICANN contracts, although this concern may not result in the development of any new ICANN policies.  

 The text of the issue areas listed below, as well as the numbering and the cross-references to provisions of the RAA, are taken from the Issues Report referenced above.   The list below appears in numerical order, not necessarily in order of priority.  Please review this list, as well as the other potential issue areas identified in the Issues Report, and let us know ASAP about any comments, questions, concerns, or alternative proposals.  In order to meet the deadline set by the chair of the Steering Group, please provide your input by close of business on Friday, September 12.  Thank you.  

 Steve Metalitz

IPC Executive Vice President

 

Recommended IPC List 

 

5. Are the current requirements that registrars make disclosures to, and obtain consent by, registrants concerning the uses of collected data adequate and appropriate? (See RAA §§ 3.7.7.4 to 3.7.7.6.)

 

6. Are the procedures currently followed by registrars adequate to promote accurate, complete, and up-to-date data, as required by both privacy and accountability principles? (See RAA §§ 3.7.7.1, 3.7.7.2, and 3.7.8, as well as the GNSO's Whois recommendations on accuracy adopted by the ICANN Board on 27 March 2003.)  

 

10. Are the current means of query-based access appropriate? Should both web-based access and port-43 access be required? (RAA § 3.3.1.)

 

12. What measures, if any, should registrars and registry operators be permitted to take to limit data mining of Whois servers?

 

14. Should the current requirement that registrars provide bulk Whois access for non-marketing uses be further limited or eliminated? (RAA § 3.3.6, as well as the GNSO's Whois recommendations on accuracy adopted by the ICANN Board on 27 March 2003.)