Fwd: RE: [council] Proposed WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006

Milton Mueller mueller at SYR.EDU
Tue Jul 18 15:34:24 CEST 2006


This is a very good motion by Bruce, imho.
Pull out section 3.

Dr. Milton Mueller
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://www.digital-convergence.org
http://www.internetgovernance.org

>>> Mawaki Chango <ki_chango at YAHOO.COM> 07/18/06 1:20 AM >>>
--- Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au> wrote:

> Subject: RE: [council] Proposed WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006
> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:10:35 +1000
> From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>
> To: "Council GNSO" <council at gnso.icann.org>
>
> Hello All,
>
> I am wondering whether we should actually pull out clause 3
> from the
> motion below and treat it separately.  Clause 3 is actually
> much broader
> in scope than WHOIS, as it is about the purposes for which
> registrars
> collect and retain data.  The WHOIS service is only one of
> several
> purposes for which data is collected and retained, and there
> are
> different services available for accessing data related to
> domain names
> depending on the intended recipients of that data.  For
> example many
> registrars provide interfaces for registrants and resellers to
> access
> data that are separate from the WHOIS service.
>
> I have been contacted by some registrars, that including this
> as part of
> a "WHOIS motion", may be confusing as some of the data
> referred to in
> the motion below is not related to WHOIS, and some of the data
> is
> related to the current WHOIS service.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org
> > [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce
> Tonkin
> > Sent: Thursday, 13 July 2006 6:59 PM
> > To: Council GNSO
> > Subject: [council] Proposed WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > Below is a revised motion derived from the tabled motion
> > discussed in Marrakech, and taking into account feedback I
> > have received since.
> >
> > The main changes are in step (3), where I have attempted to
> > link the language to current clauses in the registrar
> > accreditation agreement, and included a requirement to
> > consider privacy and law enforcement perspectives.  I have
> > also left out SSAC, as most of the focus in
> > Marrakech was on Government input and additional public
> > input.   We will
> > of course continue to liaise with the SSAC as we do with the
>
> > ALAC.   We
> > have not yet heard any concerns from SSAC or ALAC with the
> > current definition of the WHOIS service.
> >
> > I have also added a list of the relevant data elements.
> >
> > Comments/improvements welcome.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Tonkin
> >
> >
> > Proposed Motion on WHOIS
> >
> > The GNSO Council notes that the current WHOIS definition is
> > related to the service that provides public access to some
> or
> > all of the data collected, and is not a definition of the
> > purpose of the data itself.
> >
> > In response to the extensive community and Government input
> > on the definition of the purpose of WHOIS, the GNSO Council
> > agrees to undertake the following steps:
> >
> > (1)  Each Council member that voted in favour of the
> > definition will provide a brief explanation of the reason
> for
> > supporting the resolution and their understanding of its
> meaning.
> >
> > (2) The ICANN staff will provide a summary of the other
> > interpretations of the definition that have been expressed
> > during the public comment period, and subsequently in
> > correspondence from the public and Governments.
> >
> > (3) The Council will undertake a dialogue with governments,
> > via the GAC, to work towards developing a broadly
> > understandable definition of the minimum purposes for which
> > the current data required in the Registrar Accreditation
> > Agreement (see clause 3.4 of
> > http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm ),
> as listed
> > below, is collected and retained.   The dialogue should seek
>
> > to balance
> > privacy and law enforcement concerns with ICANN's mission
> and
> > core values, and must take into account the views of law
> > enforcement agencies, data protection authorities, the
> > policies and rules of access to ccTLD data, and relevant
> > national laws.
> >
> > Note that one of the purposes would be for the public
> display
> > of some or all of the data as per the recent definition of
> > the purpose of WHOIS.
> > Note that Registrars are required (clause 3.7.7.4) to
> provide
> > notice to each new or renewed Registered Name Holder stating
>
> > the purposes for which any Personal Data collected from the
> > applicant are intended, and the intended recipients or
> > categories of recipients of the data (including the Registry
>
> > Operator and others who will receive the data from Registry
> Operator).
> >
> >
> > (4) The GNSO Council requests that the WHOIS task force
> > continue with their work as specified in the terms of
> > reference taking into account the recent input that has been
>
> > provided and any further clarification as it becomes
> > available from Council.
> >
> >
> > (5)  The GNSO Council will take the final report from the
> > WHOIS task force that addresses all terms of reference and
> > the outcomes of the dialogue with governments, and consider
> > improving the wording of the WHOIS service definition so
> that
> > it is broadly understandable.
> >
> >
> >
> > List of data that must be collected and retained by
> registrars:
> >
> **************************************************************
> >
> >
>
***************************************************************
> >
> > The following is commonly referred to as the "WHOIS Data":
> > **********************************************************
> >
> > (a) The name of the Registered Name;
> >
> > (b) The names of the primary nameserver and secondary
> > nameserver(s) for the Registered Name;
> >
> > (c) The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through
>
> > Registrar's website);
> >
> > (d) The original creation date of the registration;
> >
> > (e) The expiration date of the registration;
> >
> > (f) The name and postal address of the Registered Name
> Holder;
> >
> > (g) The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice
> telephone
> > number, and (where available) fax number of the technical
> > contact for the Registered Name; and
> >
> > (h) The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice
> telephone
> > number, and (where available) fax number of the
> > administrative contact for the Registered Name.
> >
> > In addition there is:
> > *********************
> >
> > (i) The name and (where available) postal address, e-mail
> > address, voice telephone number, and fax number of the
> > billing contact;
> >
> > (j) In electronic form, the submission date and time, and
> the
> > content, of all registration data (including updates)
> > submitted in electronic form to the Registry Operator(s);
> >
> > (k) In electronic, paper, or microfilm form, all written
> > communications constituting registration applications,
> > confirmations, modifications, or terminations and related
> > correspondence with Registered Name Holders, including
> > registration contracts; and
> >
> > (l) In electronic form, records of the accounts of all
> > Registered Name Holders with Registrar, including dates and
> > amounts of all payments and refunds.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>


More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list