17.12.08 GNSO WHOIS Discussion

[William Drake]

Hello,

Is anyone else planning on being on the WHOIS call that commences in  
less than an hour, 18:00 UTC?

Absent any feedback, I guess all I can say on the call is that NCUC  
needs more time.  Unless we can get some quick consensus on one of  
the more obvious options, e.g.

1.  We could just say no to everything and score all proposed studies  
as zero.  Certainly the path of least resistance.  It sort of  
discounts our view on any given item and takes us out of the  
conversation (at least as a partner willing to compromise etc) while  
the GAC and industry factions are thinking full speed ahead and  
debating the relevant merits and technical feasibility of different  
studies/hypotheses etc., but we can do that if people want.

2.  We could instead express concern about studies as delaying  
tactics but also a willingness to support those proposed studies that  
would seem friendly to noncommercial concerns, for example

Public access to WHOIS data is responsible for a material
number of cases of misuse that have caused harm to
natural persons whose registrations do not have a
commercial purpose. http://forum.icann.org/lists/whoiscomments-
2008/msg00001.html

There are significant abuses caused by public display of
Whois. Significant abuses would include use of WHOIS
data in spam generation, abuse of personal data, loss of
reputation or identity theft, security costs and loss of data
(note – definition is from GAC recommendation 2).
http://forum.icann.org/lists/whois-comments-
2008/msg00026.html


and so on...I don't know who actually suggested these in the first  
place, the identities in the forum are redacted for privacy, but a  
priori I'd have guessed that such wording came from civil society  
types...could be wrong...

Personally, since GAC and 3 industry sectors want to press ahead, I'd  
think pushing for studies like the above might be better than just  
saying nyet to everything, but I will represent whatever the  
community view is, just need to know.  In the meanwhile, absent any  
clear guidance, I'll punt and say we need more time.

Bill


On Dec 16, 2008, at 3:08 PM, William Drake wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I believe tomorrow there is another WHOIS call.  Avri helpfully  
> suggested changing the ranking system to numeric, which will better  
> reflect constituency views (e.g. NCUC could rank studies as 0  
> rather than low priority) and allow more precise aggregation of  
> results.  But it's a bit hard to numerically express constituency  
> views without having heard what they are, so any actionable  
> feedback would be appreciated.
>
> The recs etc are here https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi? 
> whois_references and the current xls file is here https:// 
> st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?whois_discussion.
>
> If no more precise input is forthcoming, shall I just ask that  
> zeros be recorded for our priority assessment of each proposed  
> study, and that our feasibility assessments be left blank?  A bit  
> lame, but maybe better than not responding at all...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2008, at 10:13 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Bill for this great report and set of action items.
>>
>> Can we agree on how to proceed?
>>
>> a.  Rank all studies Low Priority, or No Study Needed?   
>> Differentiate and maybe identify one or two as potentially  
>> desirable, to show willingness to compromise?
>>
>> Perfect.
>>
>> Reach out to RC and ALAC, or don't bother and just do our bit?
>>
>> If you have time, definitely reach out to RrC; ALAC will be more  
>> difficult because they have “processes” to follow, but maybe our  
>> new ALAC liaison could help us out here.
>>
>> Who would like to do the coordination and physical inputting of  
>> responses?
>>
>> Due to my need to travel on the early morning (European time) of  
>> the 18th, I cannot volunteer to do this. I would otherwise. Robin?
>>
>
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>   Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> New book: Governing Global Electronic Networks,
> http://tinyurl.com/5mh9jj
> ***********************************************************
>

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
   Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
New book: Governing Global Electronic Networks,
http://tinyurl.com/5mh9jj
***********************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20081217/dff93e04/attachment.html>