ICANN considers banning privacy services
=======================================================================

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is
proposing a new Internet policy which comes at the expense of human
rights, especially privacy and freedom of speech. The proposed rules are
addressed to companies that provide WHOIS privacy/proxy services (which
restrict access to domain registrant information) and limit their
availability to individuals only, denying this service to organisations.

Why is this a problem?

When you register a domain on the Internet, you are asked for a set of
information which will appear in the WHOIS database – a public registry
with all the domain names.

Under the terms of the ICANN proposal, domain name registrants who will
register commercial sites will not have the possibility to make the
registration via companies that offer the service of de-listing personal
information from the WHOIS registry. This policy would be unfair and
discriminatory for vulnerable groups, organisations and entrepreneurs
who wish to exercise their right to freedom of expression on the
Internet. Is it even in ICANN's remit to decide what is a commercial
activity and what is not? And what is a commercial site? Is it a
non-governmental organisation (NGO) selling personalised merchandise via
a commercial site? What about a humanitarian website asking for
donations? Or a blog that sells advertisement space?

It is important to understand that there are actors such as political
groups, religious organisations, ethnic groups, gender orientation
groups, and others engaged in freedom of expression activities who have
a clear need for protection.

EDRi member ApTI has prepared a comment for ICANN's public consultation
expressing firm disapproval regarding the proposal. Below are some of
the reasons why greater confidentiality and privacy are needed in the
WHOIS directory:

1. ICANN’s anti privacy domain registration = the new Stop Online Piracy
Act (SOPA)

The copyright industry's pressure on ICANN to take action against
domains being used for infringing purposes is well known. However, the
domain name industry should not be asked to play any part in policing
the Internet by being forced to suspend Internet domain names based on
accusations of copyright or trademark infringement by a website. The
effort to restrict the privacy of domain name registrants is part of
this wider lobbying effort to push ICANN into an enforcement role.

2. Privacy and anonymity are fundamental for the open use of the Internet

The argument that criminals use proxy and privacy registrations to hide
their identities has been intensively used in the WHOIS privacy debate.
However, illegal uses represent a small minority of cases and privacy
registrations do not contribute to a wide-spread criminal behaviour. The
vast majority of domain owners are not criminals, so why put everyone at
risk just for catching few perpetrators? This measure is
disproportionate and unjustified and it resembles the deeply flawed
reasoning behind adopting mass surveillance decisions.

3. The proposal violates the Internet’s core values

The proposal closes up the free and open use of the Internet. Certain
categories of people will be left with no guarantees that their message
will be delivered without abuse and repercussions. Website owners with
less popular content or presenting dissident views will fear becoming
easy targets. With their sensitive data displayed in the public
registry, more and more people will refrain from making their voice
heard online. Self-censorship is not going to contribute to a free and
open Internet.

Several privacy campaigns opposing ICANN's proposal, such as
savedomainprivacy.org and respectourprivacy.com, were launched, and a
total of 11510 comments were sent to the public consultation. The
comments are publicly available and a report based on the inputs
received is expected on 21 July 2015.

ApTI's full comment for ICANN's public consultation (07.07.2015)
http://www.apti.ro/sites/default/files/WHOISprivacy-ICANNpubliccomment7JULY2015_0.pdf

ICANN: Initial Report on the Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation
Issues Policy Development Process (05.05.2015)
https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-initial-05may15-en.pdf

Save domain privacy
https://www.savedomainprivacy.org/with-without-privacy/

Changes to domain name rules place user privacy in jeopardy (23.06.2015)
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/changes-domain-name-rules-place-user-privacy-jeopardy

MPAA & RIAA demand DNS action against "pirate" domains (14.05.2015)
https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-riaa-demand-dns-action-against-pirate-domains-150514/

GNSO privacy & proxy services accreditation issues working group initial
report (05.05.0215)
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en

Comments to the public consultation
https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-ppsai-initial-05may15/threads.html

(Contribution by Valentina Pavel, EDRi member ApTI, Romania)