The internet is supposed to make it easier for businesses and business people to connect and get things done faster, like, for example, recruiting business people, but ironically internet governance connected groups spend most of their time physically traveling to places to get mostly nothing done, and say "more work needs to be done". Anybody remember NamesCon 2008? Me niether. There hasn't ever been a Conference that the whole world benefitted from, because conferences in the internet age are not meant for progress, conferences are just excuses for people to travel, to see and be seen, to party, in my opinion, and in my opinion proven by the fact that the internet's supposed and oft-mentioned purpose is to facilitate the entire business process, making the decision making/meeting process at conferences obsolete, unnecessary in a business sense, and also laughable, when some business people who could easily talk and compare business notes any time of day via the internet say, "Let's wait for the conference to decide on that." Why? So Travelers can say they are leaders who physically traveled to meet and talk with relevant business people, when I am as much of a leader writing this single critique via email as they are traveling to vegas to walk around and say, "ooh, that's interesting" 1000 times. While it might be fun to do, the internet community is waiting for real tangible progress and real solutions to real world problems and all the tech community has provided them in the past 12 months is an IWatch. I would argue that the "constant conference culture" limits real progress by getting people stuck in a never ending travel loop, where all they begin to care about is the quality of the next travel destination. Ron |
| Hi John. I need to add, for clarification, that I never suggested "collecting less information about domain registrants". The point of friction between European law and ICANN contracts is the duty to retain data beyond a reasonable period of time after the domain name has expired or transferred, not the ability to collect them. I am not sure that it is of any help to keep personal information of the registrant for years after he/she has lost ownership of the domain, and therefore the ability to do any harm with it. Another point of disagreement that you and I have, assuming neither of us has changed opinion lately, is how public the information sites for personal use should be (the issue related to commercial sites being totally different). However, this is not a matter where there is conflict that needs a waiver, and therefore is not part of this discussion. Cheers, Roberto > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- > bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Per conto di John R. Levine > Inviato: giovedì 17 dicembre 2015 18:45 > A: Christian de Larrinaga > Cc: At-Large Worldwide > Oggetto: Re: [At-Large] I: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- Notice of > Preliminary Determination To Grant Registrar Data Retention Waiver Request > for Ascio Technologies, Inc. Danmark - filial af Ascio Technologies, Inc. USA > > > years to focus on what it is supposed to be doing. Yet it is still > > fixated on imposing terms that are neither legally required in US and > > in cases even illegal elsewhere. > > People with no experience with large networks, which includes pretty much > everyone on the ALAC, often seem to believe that collecting less information > about domain registrants always improves the privacy of Internet users. The > reality is much more subtle. > > The vast majority of users have never registered a domain and never will, so > WHOIS doesn't affect them, while the vast majority of domains are > registered for commercial purposes, and a dismaying number for criminal > purposes. A large registrar often turns off 10,000 domains a day for malware, > phishing, and other malevolent behavior. > > The WHOIS information that most of the waivers concern is very useful for > identifying and dealing with criminals. That is so even though a lot of it is > faked, since the crooks tend to have patterns when they fake stuff. > I'm not guessing about this, I talk to people every day at network operators > who are protecting their users and law enforcement who are protecting their > citizens. > > Registrars should certainly comply with their national laws, and I agree that > some of ICANN's rules are silly, e.g., when they grant a waiver, it should > automatically apply to other registrars or registries in the same jurisdiction. > But when you make it harder to tell who's behind a domain, you're also > making it easier for criminals to siphon the money out of your grandmother's > bank account. That may be a reasonable tradeoff, but it's a tradeoff and one > that deserves better than the kneejerk reeactions we always see here. > > R's, > John > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org |