Thanks to Steve and the drafters for all this work.
I am speaking from memory on the EWG's report, as I have not had time ro re-read it, so apologies if these have already been raised. However, I do think there are some points the BC should consider:
Any contractual obligation placed on any part of the domain name supply chain (be it registries, registrars or registrants) MUST NOT contravene local law. This is especially true for data privacy issues, which are a major point of focus in Europe for example. The recent debates over the latest RAA (as a reminder, some European registrars are finding themselves unable to sign the RAA, and therefore unable to sell new gTLDs which pust them at a competitive disadvantage, because it goes against their local privacy laws:
http://blog.blacknight.com/blow-fuse.html) show that any WHOIS work must also take these obligations into account. I am worried that the EWG does not seem to have taken more than a passing glance at ccTLD WHOIS obligations such as those placed on the French registry by the French national data privacy agency (CNIL). Looking at this more closely would highlight the need for opt-out clauses for those who'se national laws would prevent them enacting any EWG recommendations as-is.
In short, I think our message here to ICANN should also be: learn from the current RAA mistakes!
Another point I have made before is that I believe as representatives of businesses worldwide, we should continually nudge for this work to encompass ccTLD WHOIS as well. We have all heard before the many reasons why the EWG should not be doing so, but as businesses, do we really think it's OK to have such extensive work be done on gTLD WHOIS only? The level of confusion this risks generating for businesses that are not domain savvy, and may not understand that there are different rules for, say, .COM and .DE, should not be underestimated.
Thanks,