Proposed NCUC statement on Whois notification

[Marc Schneiders]

Milton, thanks, very good. I'd like to suggest to consider adding,
that this notice and separate acknowledgement also be required for
renewals.

Marc

On Sat, 1 Jan 2005, at 22:15 [=GMT-0500], Milton Mueller wrote:

> Hello, please indicate assent or disagreement with this statement over
> the next 10 days. If you disagree, please propose specific modifications
> that would make it acceptable. --MM
>
> Draft of 2 Jan 2005
>
> Noncommercial domain name users welcome efforts to ensure that domain
> name registrants are better informed about the publication of their
> private contact information via the Whois system. Public, anonymous
> access to private contact information poses a number of risks to
> registrants and may violate their rights to privacy. Until this
> situation is reformed, conspicuous notification is essential.
>
> The text we reviewed contains an error. Under point 3, the sentence
> "Registrars must obtain a separate acknowledgement from registrars that
> they have read and understand these disclosures" should read "Registrars
> must obtain a separate acknowledgement from _registrants_ that they have
> read and understand these disclosures."
>
> NCUC strongly supports the requirement to set aside the notification
> and to require a distinct and separate acknowledgement from registrants
> that they are aware of the exposure of their private information. We
> observe, however, that for customers registering multiple domain names
> in the same transaction, only one such acknowledgement should be
> required.
>
> We strongly support the statement "The wording of the notice provided
> by registrars should, to the extent feasible, be uniform." Because of
> the highly competitive nature of the registrar business, registrars have
> an incentive to downplay or obscure the privacy implications of
> registering a domain name because they fear it may deter customers from
> signing up. The specific wording of the notification, therefore, should
> not be left to the discretion of registrars. We suggest that the wording
> be developed by staff subject to the approval of the GNSO Council, and
> translated as literally as possible into different languages by an
> independent party. This language should then be incorporated into the
> Registrar Accreditation Agreement.
>