proposed question to legal counsel on whois tf privacy waiver
Follow-up to comment on WHOIS Task Force and waiver of privacy rights on GNSO policy call. Robin Gross Proposed question from GNSO Council to ICANN Legal Counsel: As the GNSO undertakes its further review of the WHOIS and what data should be collected and made public, is there a possibility that the language may be misconstrued as a waiver of privacy rights, and if so, how can we best adjust it to avoid this and preserve the original intent of the Task Force?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 18/08/2005 9:39 AM Robin Gross noted that;
Follow-up to comment on WHOIS Task Force and waiver of privacy rights on GNSO policy call.
Robin Gross
Proposed question from GNSO Council to ICANN Legal Counsel:
As the GNSO undertakes its further review of the WHOIS and what data should be collected and made public, is there a possibility that the language may be misconstrued as a waiver of privacy rights, and if so, how can we best adjust it to avoid this and preserve the original intent of the Task Force?
This looks good to me. - -- -rwr Contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross Skydasher: A great way to start your day My weblog: http://www.byte.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP) iD8DBQFDBJ3L6sL06XjirooRAi3cAJ4gFpO7VMWNPqBc1zPL4lhoJIYRKQCePtgT o0psM02lnE2VbdO5bi4dUvE= =U7KP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Still isn't quite as carefully crafted as I'd like to see. Not a lawyer, but I have sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much experience in being advised by lawyers... that I am careful about words like "is there a possibility"... learned a long time ago from a number of lawyers that "there is always a possibility" if one looks long enough. I think we need to ask for another round of edits to tighten up and clarify what the question is and note that the question is related to the actual recommendation that is before the Council, not a wide ranging general question. Perhaps some more of the lawyers on the TF, or the Council can join in the "crafting" of the question.... thus I've copied David Fares who is one of the BC reps, who is a lawyer. He doesn't have posting privileges, so should he want to contribute, I'll provide his inputs as BC inputs. Marilyn -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ross Rader Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 10:40 AM To: robin@robingross.com Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] proposed question to legal counsel on whois tf privacy waiver -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 18/08/2005 9:39 AM Robin Gross noted that;
Follow-up to comment on WHOIS Task Force and waiver of privacy rights on GNSO policy call.
Robin Gross
Proposed question from GNSO Council to ICANN Legal Counsel:
As the GNSO undertakes its further review of the WHOIS and what data should be collected and made public, is there a possibility that the language may be misconstrued as a waiver of privacy rights, and if so, how can we best adjust it to avoid this and preserve the original intent of the Task Force?
This looks good to me. - -- -rwr Contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross Skydasher: A great way to start your day My weblog: http://www.byte.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP) iD8DBQFDBJ3L6sL06XjirooRAi3cAJ4gFpO7VMWNPqBc1zPL4lhoJIYRKQCePtgT o0psM02lnE2VbdO5bi4dUvE= =U7KP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (3)
-
Marilyn Cade -
Robin Gross -
Ross Rader