ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[nc-whois]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[nc-whois] revised remaining accuracy issues


Title: Message
Here is a slightly revised draft of the issues report circulated last week.  This incorporates Thomas' suggestions and the discussion on our conference call on Thursday to the best of my recollection.  
 
Steve Metalitz
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP [mailto:mcade@att.com]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 11:28 AM
To: NC-WHOIS (E-mail)
Subject: [nc-whois] updates....

I'll be posting later tonight to the Task Force with a specific list of issues.
 
We  need to be streamlined on the contribution to the Council and focus the contribution which we agree to tomorrow on the list of issues.
The "surround" in the rest of the outline, which we are all still working through, will need to be completed over the next few days. So, please
continue completing your contributions on all other segments, but make it a priority to focus on "issues" and description of issues in the
discussion tomorrow. We have to reach agreement on that tomorrow.
 
So, for tomorrow, we will focus in on the list of issues per se. That is in the outline as item 4, I believe.
 
I understand that Thomas is skeptical [:-)]
 
However, after further consultation with the Chair of council, we need to focus on the Issues themselves. 
The rest of our work will be good to contribute, but the issues themselves are what is needed for the Council contribution to the
agenda.
 
We have announced we will be doing the issues reports and it is important to complete our task.
 
Finally, in response to Abel,  Steve's contribution seems to be a factual submission from the FTC, to the WHOIS TF.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Abel Wisman [mailto:abel@able-towers.com]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 11:17 AM
To: 'Steve Metalitz'; 'Ruchika Agrawal'; Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP; 'NC-WHOIS (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [nc-whois] Contribution Of Globally, Publicly Accessible WHOI S Information To Identity Theft And Other Fraud

reply for the staff of the FTC not representing the opinion of the FTC,
 
what argument is it precisely that you are wanting to make ?
 
abel
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nc-whois@dnso.org [mailto:owner-nc-whois@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Steve Metalitz
Sent: 10 March 2003 14:01
To: Steve Metalitz; 'Ruchika Agrawal'; Marilyn Cade; 'NC-WHOIS (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [nc-whois] Contribution Of Globally, Publicly Accessible WHOI S Information To Identity Theft And Other Fraud

Attached please find the FTC response to the Task Force survey. 
 
Steve Metalitz
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Metalitz [mailto:metalitz@iipa.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 6:08 PM
To: 'Ruchika Agrawal'; Marilyn Cade; 'NC-WHOIS (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [nc-whois] Contribution Of Globally, Publicly Accessible WHOI S Information To Identity Theft And Other Fraud

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

Domain Names Whois TF DRAFT 1.1 issues report on remaining accuracy issues sjm 031003.doc



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>