<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><<<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>
I look forward to discussion within the constituency<BR>
on what a future WHOIS should look like.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>>><BR>
<BR>
Danny:<BR>
This is a discussion that has already taken place -- at huge effort --<BR>
over the last four and a half years. We have talked about who our constituency represents, how we are the only voice in the whole of ICANN for the voices we represent (noncommercial communication, including that of political and human rights organizations and civil society generally). We have discussed at length all plans that have come from the Whois Task Force and taken the lead, in fact, in a huge amount of the Whois TF research, drafting and editing (over the years).<BR>
<BR>
One great height of our work was the Vancouver Whois Conference where the majority of ICANN turned to our view, listened to it, and came away agreeing with us. We brought forward ccTLDs that had real data protection/privacy policies (.UK, .CA and .JP) and they explained how and why they are bound to comply with the data protection laws of their countries. Then other telecommunications experts from other areas, especially #2 Telco/ISP Telus from Canada, explained that data protection laws are a basic way of commerce -- a legal requirement and good customer business.<BR>
<BR>
All of this is posted. Let me refer you to our original website <A HREF="www.ncdnhc.org">www.ncdnhc.org</A>. Look under Archives for the spreadsheet of Privacy Laws from 2004. Some data is outdated, but the wave of countries adopting data protection as a fundamental protection is only increasing. For slides from the Vancouver conference, look on the homepage under "What's New" click "Whois-Privacy Conference." This Agenda/Schedule (a PDF) has links to the superb slides of many speakers. <BR>
<BR>
NCUC helped shape the discussion and debate of the GNSO -- and we did by consulting with our Constituency. Marrakech had a very long debate.<BR>
<BR>
We also did it by appealing to those Government Representatives who legislate, investigate and enforce data protection laws. The GAC has been poor about reaching out to non-GAC representatives who might be expert, concerned with and interested in the Whois debate. So we did -- and they responded. Read the letters to ICANN from the Chairman of the Article 29 Working Party, the Belgian Data Protection Commission, the Canadian Data Protection Commissioner and others. See <A HREF="http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/">http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/</A>, Government Input, top of blue column.<BR>
<BR>
NCUC paved the way for others. I think you will enjoy what we have done. <BR>
Tx for taking a close look, <BR>
Kathy<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Kathryn A. Kleiman, Esq.<BR>
Internet Law & Policy Counsel<BR>
McLeod, Watkinson & Miller<BR>
One Massachusetts Avenue NW<BR>
Suite 800<BR>
Washington DC 20001<BR>
(202) 842-2345 ext. 256<BR>
KKleiman@mwmlaw.com <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>