Michael: There is no barrier to non-ALAC members attending the call. That said, every additional person on the call adds to the cost, and it already costs about US$12,000 per year for these calls, so I would hope that the community could use the recordings of the calls, the verbatim transcripts, and the summary minutes and not attend the calls in person as well. Otherwise, we will cut into the budget provision for teleconferences which exists for RALO teleconferences... On 10 Jul 2007, at 14:56, Michael Maranda wrote:
Is there a clear policy on who can join this meeting? I had no knowledge as to whether persons not on the committee could join the call, and only learned that possibility after call had commenced.
On 7/10/07, Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg@web.de> wrote: Dear Wendy,
thank you for the update. I hope you are going to take part in our tel conf call today as the Whois issue is important to the individual users and we would very much welcome your advice.
Best Annette
Wendy Seltzer schrieb:
The WHOIS working group is now working around the document attached to this list message: < http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-whois-wg/msg00460.html>
Although the OPOC (Operational Point of Contact) is still being discussed, the draft burdens it procedural hurdles that would make it impracticably costly -- such as verification of the OPOC or accreditation with ICANN and status as an agent for the registrant. The intent behind many of these proposals seems, as is common, to prevent adoption of more privacy-respecting WHOIS display. If we don't keep the contact lightweight, it will be too costly for registrars to implement and individuals to adopt.
As this is on the agenda for the WG's July 11 call, <http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-whois-wg/msg00491.html> it would be helpful if others who have been participating in the WG's work would also express their concerns, either on list or on the call.
The OPOC's responsibility was conceived as one to pass information along to the registrant, without requiring the registrant to list his or her direct contact information in public WHOIS. Somewhere along the way, the WG has given the OPOC an additional role of REVEALing information when a query is made but not responded to. This too seems like an overextension and loss for privacy, at least where there is no legal reason for the registrant's information to be revealed. As an individual participant, I continue to advocate that only due process of law should force disclosure of contact information that individuals choose to protect. I'd be happy to hear support or argument with that view.
I will be happy to join the ALAC call if there is interest in discussing any of these issues. Please let me know, and share your views if you're not participating directly in the WG.
--Wendy
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Executive Director, CTCNet Chicago Chapter Co-Founder, Chicago Digital Access Alliance Co-Chair, Illinois Community Technology Coalition President, Association For Community Networking
Support the efforts of the Chicago Digital Access Alliance: http:// www.digitalaccessalliance.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org