EPIC grant to NCUC

[Adam Peake]

>Adam Peake wrote:
>
>>There will be another workshop in Whois at Carthage and I think
>>that's the most important issue on ICANN's agenda at the moment.
>>Perhaps a good idea to support a second Whois/privacy expert
>>(Stephanie Perrin, if she's able to attend, or is not anyway
>>attending on EPIC's behalf, or Alan Davidson, CDT) or someone from
>>Europe who could provide comment on issues beyond the US/N. American
>>view.
>
>Adam, I am quite surprised by your "racist" comment.
>You sound only US/N or Europe can have some views on Whois.



e.g. <http://lyris.tucows.com:8080/read/messages?id=180863>

European experience seems it may be helpful in some ways to our
arguments (I am *not* suggesting NCUC/EPIC would pay for Moers.)


>Definitely many other parts of the world do care the issue. As we saw AUDA,
>whether we believe or not it is Asia Pacific region instead of
>Europe or NA, they do
>care.

Irony?

Thanks,

Adam


>And recently, according to Sept. 22 news, KISA(Korea Information Secuirty
>Agency) also announced some recommendations on Whois. You can see from the
>following url.
>
>http://security.inews24.com/php/news_view.php?g_menu=080200&g_serial=99203
>(in Korean)
>
>It emphasizes domain registrars should give the registrants options not to
>disclose their whois. When the registrars disclose the whois after agreement
>from the registrant, it should be notified to the registrants in advance.
>
>>No detailed agenda from ICANN.  Hard to know what additional
>>expertise might be required.  This has always been a problem of
>>trying to target funds for attendance at ICANN meetings.
>
>One of agenda many of you don't care as native speakers of English could be
>IDN(Multilingual Domain Issues). The issue has been silently discussed and
>presented as a conclusion. It is another frustration to those who are going to
>be affected by the decision as users.
>
>Hope you can explain what you said.
>YJ


--