FYI, my reply to the Thick Whois DT. Alan
To: "Gnso-thickwhois-dt@icann.org DT" <Gnso-thickwhois-dt@icann.org> From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] a modest amendment to our charter point on "privacy and data protection"
I have surveyed the ALAC on the new wording that Avri has supplied. The consensus (but not unanimous) view is that the current wording in the Proposed charter should stand.
The issue raised in Avri's message that I have copied below formed part (but not all) of the rationale. Although I personally do not believe that there is any substantive issue related to mentioned rights and thick/thin Whois, *IF* this is indeed an issue, then is has far wider impact that the narrow scope of this PDP allows, and should be the subject of a separate PDP.
Alan
At 15/10/2012 08:54 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
In sense though ww will also be talking about how thick whois is to be done by all registries. Both in the new gTLDs and the incumbents, even those already doing thick. So this affects every Registry, every Registrar and every Registrant.
And there are, in my view, jurisdictional implications in Thick Whois that are different from Thin Whois. Most of these center around the fact that once the Registry also has the Whois info as opposed to just the Registrar, people in Canada, e.g., no longer have the data privacy, consumer etc rights they have in Canada, because someone can base demands etc on the laws of the Registry's country of business as well.
avri