Stephanie,

Are you referring to the criminal element who knows how to use WHOIS to hide themselves?  That is certainly a huge problem and not limited to violations of criminal law -- it is also a huge problem with regard to lawbreakers whose actions are not criminal in nature.

Greg

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
Totally agree Nigel, but providing access to law enforcement is not the same as publishing to the world, and the criminal element who know how to use WHOIS.  At the moment, options for nuanced disclosure are limited.
SP


On 2015-07-30 11:00, Nigel Roberts wrote:
Stephanie

The whole debate about the right to private and family life is more nuanced.

Without turning this list into a discussion on how respect for human rights is guaranteed on this contintent, it's worth pointing out that respecting the right of privacy does NOT mean closing off domain registration data to law enforcment. Quite the opposite.

The privacy right is a qualified right -- so it CAN be interfered with

- lawfully, when necessary in a democratic society; so long as it is
- proportionate.

And I don't think that conflicts with anybody's 'marching orders'.


On 30/07/15 15:53, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
I hate to complicate this discussion, but I feel duty bound to point out
that the first human right many people think of these days with respect
to the domain name registration system is privacy.  Freedom of
expression and the openness of the Internet rolls more easily off the
tongue....but if anyone says what about privacy, the WHOIS would have to
be re-examined.  This of course conflicts with the marching orders that
the NTIA has had for ICANN since its inception.
Stephanie Perrin

On 2015-07-30 5:59, Erika Mann wrote:
In addition to Avri's points, such a provision could help as well to
ensure that future business models that relate to more sensitive
strings (.gay for example) will continue to be treated as any other
string.

Erika

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org
<mailto:avri@acm.org>> wrote:

    Hi,

    Off the top of my head, I think a first thing we would have to do
    would
    be to start understanding the impact, if any, of ICANN operations and
    policies on human rights.  Some of this work is already starting
    in the
    human rights working party (HRWP), though that is a rather informal
    beginning.  I would also think that some part of the staff would
    need to
    start taking these issues into consideration.  I do not think that it
    would cause any serious changes in the near future but would make us
    more aware as time went on, and would give us a basis for discussion
    both in the HRWP and in the ACSO and Board.

    In terms of the specific things it might limt us from, and this would
    require some analysis on specifc events, might be creating any
    kinds of
    policies or operations that forced  limitation of content, beyond the
    limitations required by law for incitement, on domain named sites.  It
    would in fact strengthen our postion in that respect.

    Most important though, it would cover a hole left by the loss of the
    NTIA backstop, on any issue concerning freedom of expression, free
    flow
    of information or openness of the Internet.

    thanks
    avri

    On 30-Jul-15 11:07, Drazek, Keith wrote:
    > Hi Chris,
    >
    > I'll have to defer to others with more expertise on this one.
    It's a
    > good question that should be addressed.
    >
    > Best,
    > Keith
    >
    > On Jul 30, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au
    <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au>
    > <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au>>> wrote:
    >
    >> Keith,
    >>
    >> This looks interesting. Could we think of an example of something
    >> concrete ICANN would have to do if it made this commitment? Or
    >> something it would not be able to do?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >>
    >>
    >> Chris
    >>
    >>
    >>> On 30 Jul 2015, at 18:16 , Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com
    <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>
    >>> <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Hi Avri,
    >>>
    >>> In order to tie your suggestion directly to the language in
    >>> Secretary Strickling's April 2014 written congressional testimony
    >>> (included in a prior email) and to reduce concerns about scope
    >>> creep, would language along these lines be acceptable to you?
    >>>
    >>>> "Within its mission and in its operations, ICANN will be
    committed
    >>>> to respect the fundamental human rights of the exercise of free
    >>>> expression and the free flow of information."
    >>>
    >>> Speaking personally, I could probably support this formulation. To
    >>> be clear, I have not discussed this with the RySG, but it's
    >>> consistent with the requirements outlined by NTIA so I think it's
    >>> certainly worth considering.
    >>>
    >>> I'm not advocating including this in the Bylaws, but I'm not
    >>> objecting to it either. However, if we don't reach consensus for
    >>> adding to the Bylaws, I definitely think this is worth further
    >>> consideration in WS2 and would support an explicit reference using
    >>> this or similar language and timetable for doing so.
    >>>
    >>> Regards,
    >>> Keith
    >>>
    >>>> On Jul 30, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org
    <mailto:avri@acm.org>
    >>>> <mailto:avri@acm.org <mailto:avri@acm.org>>> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Within its mission, ICANN will be committed to respect
    fundamental
    >>>>  human rights in its operationsespecially with regard to the
    exercise
    >>>>  of free expression or the free flow of information.
    >>> _______________________________________________
    >>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
    >>> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
    >>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>>
    >>>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
    >>
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
    > Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
    > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community


    ---
    This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
    https://www.avast.com/antivirus

    _______________________________________________
    Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
    Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community




_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community



_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community