Maybe, but the way it's being framed in public is a little odd. It's not simply being framed as contract enforcement and seeking clarity, but more about "saving whois" - whereas in reality the "whois" under dispute isn't data of any real value. -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 On 28/05/2018, 08:24, "EURO-Discuss on behalf of Lutz Donnerhacke" <euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of lutz@donnerhacke.de> wrote: * Olawale Bakare wrote: > ICANN Files Legal Action in Germany to Preserve WHOIS Data My two cents. That's very good news: ICANN does respect the new law. The older German law containg very similar regulations was always ignored by ICANN. So going to the court (especially in Germany) signals the registrars, that ICANN is willing to accept an external decision rather than leaving the registrar alone between ICANN accreditation rules an local law. _______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org