If a registrar is 
      in compliance with its obligations under the RAA, it is advising its 
      registrants "who is collecting the information, why the 
      information is being collected, and how it is going to be used."  I 
      have posted the RAA citations previously to this list.  
       
      "The global, public accessibility of WHOIS data 
      contradict[s] FTC's advice"  -- I think this would come as news to 
      the FTC, which has strongly supported public access to Whois and which 
      submitted a response to our Task Force's survey to that effect.  
      
       
      If this is intended as a statement of the FTC's 
      position or approach to Whois then I believe we should have the FTC review 
      it.  If it is intended as the interpretation by one Task Force member 
      of how FTC positions on other aspects of privacy ought to be applied to 
      Whois  --i.e., as a critique of the FTC's actual Whois position - 
      then that is certainly another story, but I am not sure why a critique of 
      alleged inconsistency by the FTC belongs in the issues report of this Task 
      Force.    
       
      I am also concerned about the suggestion that "the 
      enforcement of the accuracy of Whois data" is an innovative or novel 
      suggestion of this Task Force.  These obligations regarding accuracy 
      have been on the books for years and have been "enforced" a number of 
      times, whether in the sense of registrants losing their registrations for 
      willful submission of false data or in terms of ICANN action to enforce 
      the obligation of registrars to respond to complaints of false Whois 
      data.  
       
      Steve Metalitz 
       
      -----Original 
      Message-----
From: 
      Ruchika Agrawal [mailto:agrawal@epic.org] 
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 2:01 
      PM
To: Cade,Marilyn S - 
      LGCRP; NC-WHOIS (E-mail)
Subject: [nc-whois] Contribution Of 
      Globally, Publicly Accessible WHOIS Information To Identity Theft And 
      Other Fraud
       
      Dear All:
Here are the 
      paragraphs on the contribution of globally, publicly accessible WHOIS 
      information to identity theft and other fraud:
      The U.S. 
      Federal Trade Commission (FTC) plays a critical role both in the 
      investigation of consumer fraud and in the protection of consumers from 
      fraud.  According to the FTC's website, "The FTC works for the 
      consumer to prevent fraudulent, deceptive and unfair business practices in 
      the marketplace and to provide information to help consumers spot, stop 
      and avoid them." [See, for example, http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/online/dontharvest.htm]
      In this vein, 
      the FTC advises consumers not to disclose personal information, and if 
      consumers choose to disclose personal information, they should know who is 
      collecting the information, why the information is being collected, and 
      how it is going to be used.   Not only does the global, public 
      accessibility of WHOIS data contradict FTC's advice, but the consumer, as 
      a domain name registrant, is stripped of these abilities, as the 
      registrant has no way of knowing who collected his/her WHOIS data, why the 
      information was collected, and how the collector intends to use the 
      information.   Further yet, with the enforcement of the accuracy 
      of WHOIS data, as is recommended by the WHOIS Task Force, consumers will 
      not even have a choice on whether to disclose their personal 
      information.  The alternative to relinquish a domain name is not 
      giving consumers a genuine choice, and instead infringes on Internet free 
      speech.
      The global, 
      public accessibility of WHOIS data imposes risks on domain name 
      registrants, and may contribute to identify theft as well as other 
      fraud.  The FTC's guidelines in their effort to safeguard consumer 
      privacy are applicable to the protection of domain name registrants; these 
      safeguards should be appropriately enforced.
      Regards,
Ruchika