Dear all,
Attached is a revised spreadsheet presenting privacy
notification information on the
Top 10 randomly registrars. I have archived the relevant
sections and all urls of the privacy and registration documents for each
registrar at;
http://www.furl.net/members/mfarrell10 , and click on the topic entitled 'Top 10 registrars - whois policies'.
This spreadsheet analyses the registrars' compliance
with section 3.7.7.7 of the R.A.A.,
quoting the relevant part of their registration agreements or privacy policies
for each sub-section 3.7.7.4.1 - 3.7.7.4.4.
I've also included
some bullet points of analysis, essentially some features I observed in
compiling the data. These are purely interpretive on my part and you may
of course draw your own conclusions from the data.
Overall, the data
gathered indicates significantly greater uniformity amongst privacy notification
and information among the top 10 registrars than in the rest of the
market.
- Between the Top 10
and the randomly chosen registrars, notification procedures are more or
less uniform (i.e. virtually all notify the registrant using a link and tick
box on the payment page).
- However,
information provision about privacy varies significantly. Most of
the Top 10 registrars provide a separate privacy page that is accessed either
directly from the home page or via a link from the customer
registration agreement. Of the randomly chosen 10, only 3 provide a separate
privacy page; one of the three is a New Zealand company affiliated to a top 10
registrar, the other two are UK companies. The sample is too
small to draw any firm conclusions, but it may indicate that both
size/visibility and also the jurisdiction/cultural tradition are two important
factors regarding dedicated privacy
pages.
- Few registrars explicitly reference the
purposes for which data are collected, but most describe the uses to which it
is put.
- While most
agreements hit all the main relevant points of the R.A.A., they do so by
organising the terms and concepts in very different ways. The majority
of registrars in both groups appeared to be observing the R.A.A. in their
provision of information on stated uses of personal data.
- The randomly chosen
registrars seem less likely than the top 10 to explicitly state the
requirement to publish personal data in Whois and/or to mention ICANN in this
context.
It may be that
increased competition and visibility at the top of the market have made
notification and information practices rather more uniform amongst the top 10
registrars.
Best regards,
Maria