Response to request from GNSO Council for follow up information on WHOIS studies

[Mary Wong]

Like Bill, I'd be interested in suggestions and comments, particularly
from those who were either involved with the 2008 WG and/or have
experience and interest in WHOIS issues. I'd also recommend the document
Bill attached as useful reading.
 
My concerns about approving studies at this time include possible
budget overload (e.g. will funding WHOIS studies take $$ away from other
GNSO activities, particularly ones NCUC/NCSG consider more important or
timely?) and how to decide which one to approve first.
 
ICANN staff appear to suggest that a study on Registrant Identification
(i.e. whether registrations attributable to a natural person obscures a
domain's commercial nature) might be the most feasible, over Misuse and
Abuse & Reveal studies. I agree (though that doesn't mean I support
doing it), because my overwhelming concern about Misuse and Abuse &
Reveal is the problem of "correlation vs. causation" (of harmful
conduct, illegal activities etc.)
 
What I'd like some assistance on is the question whether members think
obtaining quantitative data through any, some or all of these studies
has the potential (i.e. CAN, not necessarily WILL) to actually advance
the WHOIS debate in GNSO policy making (discounting any natural cynicism
or pessimism born from past experience, if possible.)
Thanks,
Mar
 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network
(SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
y
>>> 


From: William Drake <william.drake at GRADUATEINSTITUTE.CH>
To:<NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Date: 4/7/2010 2:37 PM
Subject: [council] Response to request from GNSO Council for follow up
information on WHOIS studies
Hi

In the past we've indicated a fairly blanket lack of interest in
studies.   Now with the process moving forward shall we stick to this
stance, or might we want to provide more differentiated input that could
help shape the direction?

Best,

Bill 

On Apr 7, 2010, at 3:32 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:




Under Agenda Item 3 (Whois Studies) on 1 April, Council members were
encouraged to discuss and evaluate the Whois studies with their
respective Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies and be prepared to
provide budget direction to submit a request for funds for Fiscal Year
11 at the next Council meeting on 21 April 2010.  In that meeting our
goal will be to discuss specific budget recommendations for Whois Study
funding.
If you have not already done so, please discuss this with your
respective groups.  I strongly encourage submittal of proposals for
funding in advance so if any of your group members have ideas, please
submit them to the Council list, preferably at least eight days in
advance of 21 April so that the rest of us can share the proposals with
our groups before the meeting.
Thanks, Chuck




From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen at icann.org>
Date: March 31, 2010 8:48:11 PM GMT+02:00
To: "'GNSO Council '" <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] WHOIS documents posted


Dear All,

Please note on the 'Issues page' 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/

that the following documents relating to WHOIS have been recently
posted: 

# WHOIS Current Activity (updated April 2010)
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-update-01apr10-en.htm

# Inventory of WHOIS Service Requirements - Initial Report (26 March
2010)
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-service-requirements-initial-report-26mar10-en.pdf

# Whois Studies Report for GNSO 23 March 2010
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.pdf




From: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster at icann.org>
Date: April 6, 2010 2:59:38 AM GMT+02:00
To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] Response to request from GNSO Council for follow up
information on WHOIS studies

All,

On the GNSO Council’s 1 April 2010 call, Council members began to
discuss staff’s recent report analyzing information gathered to-date on
proposed studies of WHOIS. That report is posted
here:http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.pdf
, summarized by slides:
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/whois-studies-presentation-01apr10-en.pdf.
  
On the call, Council members suggested that it would be helpful to
identify the WHOIS policy issues that each proposed study is intended to
inform.  Recognizing that there is a long history of debate, Council
members also wanted to understand better the nature of the concerns and
viewpoints about these studies that have been expressed to-date.  The
following is an initial response to that request.  Most of the content
was extracted from the original study proposals themselves, since study
proposers were asked to specifically state the “utility” of each study
being proposed. That means that the ideas stated are often in the words
of the study proponents and may not be considered “neutral”.  Some
additional ideas were gleaned from past council and working group
discussions.  While I’m at it, in the attached I also offer some
thoughts and insights shared by others on the potential policy
“relevance” of other pending WHOIS studies.  It might be helpful to
mention that as I assembled this list I noticed that the list includes
many things we might learn; it is less expansive on precisely how
policies might change.  It also might be worthwhile for the Council to
talk more about that in your upcoming discussion.
Note that I did not wade into speculating on who the likely proponents
or critics of various studies would be.  I tried to extract ideas that
have been stated already and I would encourage the Council members to
offer the views of their stakeholder groups and constituencies,
including amplifying, clarifying or correcting anything I’ve included in
this document. 
Note: This is a working document and does not constitute or reflect the
views of ICANN on any pending or proposed WHOIS study. 
Thanks, Liz
Liz Gasster
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100408/4a442850/attachment.html>