[ncdnhc-discuss] [long] The NCDNHC's .org report is numerically inconsistent.

[Harold J. Feld]

ORGWatch looked like their version of WLS.  While some intellectual 
property types might want it, it seems a fairly generic service.

Harold

Thomas Roessler wrote:

> On 2002-08-20 17:46:41 -0400, Harold J. Feld wrote:
> 
>> ISOC was the only applicant to address the privacy issue with ORGCloak 
>> service.  The description makes clear this was done to safeguard 
>> noncommercial speakers.  
> 
> 
> Ah, ok.  I have to admit that, when I saw that one, I thought much  more 
> about "personal" registrations than "non-commercial" ones...  I read 
> through that part of the application fairly quickly, so I  missed the 
> rationale for this service. Thanks for the clarification.
> 
>> The caveat that it will consult with the IPC to implement the  service 
>> in a way that will still allow intellectual property  holders and law 
>> enforcement to have access to necessary  information to persue 
>> legitimate claims does not negate the  usefulness of the service. The 
>> ORGSURE certification service  would, on its own, constitute a "low" 
>> on the services, such as was done with ORGFoundation.
> 
> 
>> I see no services targeted to IP users.
> 
> 
> I suppose that ORGwatch could be pretty appealing to them.