ajp at GLOCOM.AC.JP
Wed Jun 22 14:04:12 CEST 2005
yes, we really need non-commercial experts present at this meeting
"THE USE OF DOMAIN NAME AND IP ADDRESS DATA IN COMBATTING ILLEGAL
ACTIVITIES ON THE INTERNET" (sorry for caps, that's how it cut and
GAC's meeting, but if we suggest relevant people to present a view
from a data protection, privacy and rights perspective I can only
think they will find it useful...
But who? As Karen says, think it's more people on data protection,
privacy and security, rather than Whois per se. Some thoughts:
Simon Davies or Gus Hosein, Privacy international <http://www.privacy.org>
Rikke Frank Joergensen, Senior adviser at The Danish Institute for Human Rights
David Maher (?)
At 12:47 PM +0100 6/22/05, karen banks wrote:
>I am debating over how many people the Consituency needs at this meeting.
>>I have been a member of the WHOIS Task Force 2 since it started over a
>>year and a half ago. The recommendation I drafted (#2) is now in
>>circulation. I see clearly the traps that are being laid for our
>>Constituency and our privacy concerns in Luxembourg. It is ridiculous
>>that only law enforcement issues/WHOIS are being discussed while the data
>>protection officials who wanted to attend this meeting and talk were
>>dismissed (for some future, remote meeting). I think there are some snags
>>we can throw into the process...
>>I think our Executive Board should meet to debate and decide our
>>priorities for this meeting -- and who they would like to see attend.
>Many civil society advocates who work in data protection, privacy rights
>and 'security' issues have become involved indirectly in the WHOIS debates
>through the WSIS/WGIG process.. by this i mean advocates who work
>explicitly in these areas such as represetnatives from Privacy
>International, and various national human rights institutes.
>They have been very helpful in our work in the WGIG recently and the WSIS
>Would it be useful to try to bring one of these people to the meeting as an
>additional 'expert' on privacy, data protection and associated legal and
>If NCUC was agreeable, we would probably have to look for resources
>(thougnthis may not be the situation in all cases).
>Let me know what you think..
More information about the Ncuc-discuss