Thanks for this Volker

I would be supportive of this language

Regards

 

Michele

 

 

 

 

I can't support the amended language for obvious reasons. The draft proposed here is clearly drafted to favor one position. If we want to get anywere, we need a more balanced approach.

How about this:

1)

c)

As noted above, the WG appears to unanimously agree that the mere fact of a domain being registered as a commercial entity, or conducting commercial activity in other spheres, should not prevent the use of p/p domain name registration services. 

A number of WG members, representing their SO/AC/C, noted that in the “offline world” businesses often are required to register with the relevant authority as well as disclose details about their identity and location. These members suggested that domains used for commercial purposes should be ineligible for privacy and proxy registrations. However, a number of other WG members, also representing their SO/AC/C, noted that where similar legal requirements already exist for the "online world", such disclosure is usually required to be contained under a prominent link on the web site as in the translation from the "offline world" to the "online world" legislators usually focussed on the content available under the domain name, not the domain name registration itself. Further, these members argue that there may be valid reasons why domain name registrants using their domain names for commercial purposes may legitimately need the availability of such services.

There is further divergence within the WG between those members expressing the view that it is both necessary and practical to distinguish in the whois between domains used for a commercial purpose and those domains that are not used for a noncommercial purpose, and those members that expressed the view that it is neither practical nor necessary to require p/p service providers to make that distinction.

Volker

All -- as evidenced on last week's call, there is concern about the language in the draft conclusion for Cat C threshold question. Per the request for specific edits, attached are redlined edits to the template submitted for the group's consideration by FWD Strategies Int'l, LegitScript, MarkMonitor and DomainTools. We look forward to your comments and further discussion if needed. 

 

Thanks,

Libby

 

www.FWDstrategies.com

 

 

On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:

Following on from Steve's emails, please find attached the updated templates for C3 and D1, incorporating the notes from the meeting (if I've missed anything, please share your comments / edits with the mailing list). To re-emphasise the action items from the meeting:

1. Please provide your input on the draft preliminary conclusion for C threshold, C1 and C2 as circulated by Don. Several of you suggested removing the word 'overwhelming' from the draft. Are there any other proposed edits?
2. Please provide your input on question C3, especially if you are of the view that there should be differences in the data fields displayed for commercial entity and natural person P/P registrations.
3. Please provide your input on question D1, especially whether it would be desirable to have a public registry of P/P services contact information and a requirement to respond to enquiries both from P/P customers as well as those looking to contact P/P customers. Input on what would qualify as a 'response' and a possible timeframe for responses are also encouraged. 
4. Kathy and James will provide an update at the next meeting on issues surrounding transfers between registrars of P/P registrations and possible questions the WG may want to address in this context.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

From: <Metalitz>, Steven <met@msk.com>
Date: Tuesday 20 May 2014 18:06
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org" <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>
Subject: PPSAI WG -- questions for list

 

Thanks to all participants on today’s call.  Following up on requests made on the call ----

 

Regarding Don’s draft preliminary text regarding questions C(threshold), C 1 and C2, please circulate your comments and (especially welcomed!) proposed edits.  Don’s draft is re-attached here for ready reference.

 

Regarding question C.3:  If the following applies to you, please respond on the list:

 

IF you believe that privacy/proxy services ought to be open to commercial entities under some circumstances, THEN should there be a difference in the data displayed for such registrations (vs. what is displayed for p/p registrations by natural persons)?  If the answer is YES, please specify the differences.  

 

For myself I will say that my answer is NO, but I hope that any YES people will step forward on the list. 

 

Thanks!

 

Steve Metalitz, vice chair

 

 

 

From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 3:39 PM
To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Proposed Agenda - PPSAI WG Meeting

 

Dear All,

 

Please find below the proposed agenda for tomorrow's PPSAI WG Meeting.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

Proposed Agenda – PPSAI WG Meeting – 20 May 2014

1. Roll Call / SOI
2. Review proposed preliminary conclusion for threshold question, C1 and C2 (as circulated by Don)
3. Review C3 – is additional response/discussion needed in light of item 2? (see template attached)
4. Continue deliberations on D1 (see updated template attached)
5. Next steps / confirm next meeting

_______________________________________________
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

 

--

Libby Baney, JD

President

FWD Strategies International

www.fwdstrategies.com

P: 202-499-2296

 

_______________________________________________

Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list

Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

-- 

Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Volker A. Greimann

- Rechtsabteilung -

Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net

Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net

www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com

Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems

www.twitter.com/key_systems

Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin

Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken 

Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu 

Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.

--------------------------------------------

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Best regards,

Volker A. Greimann

- legal department -

Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net

Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net

www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com

Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems

www.twitter.com/key_systems

CEO: Alexander Siffrin

Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken 

V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu 

This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.