Greg,
If we can say that not all legitimate purposes have to be catered for,
then I agree with you. :)
If we say that tracking down the registrar of a domain as part of
trademark research is a legitimate purpose, that does not mean that we
have to design the system for this purpose, right?
To try an analogy: We can recognize that using the plastic top of a
garbage can as a sled is legitimate, but we don't insist on designing
lids with sledding in mind.
Full disclosure: My own take on the "legitimate purpose" discussion
with regards to "thin data" is that we need *some* purpose for both
gathering and publishing the information, because otherwise privacy
laws may prohibit companies from gathering or publishing it. Luckily I
think that there are so many such purposes that the need for the
information is indisputable.
Jumping ahead... as I said in a prior call (sorry for missing ones since
then), I would prefer that the information is then allowed for any
purpose, without restriction, because otherwise you have to have not
only tiresome rules about what is allowed but also the Internet Police
to enforce those rules, which seems like a step towards Armageddon.
Given that we're still talking about "thin data", which is basically
just a pointer to a registrar who has *actual* data, my own
recommendation is not to stress too much. This stuff is only very, very
vaguely personally identifiable.
Cheers,
--
Shane
At 2017-01-21 14:51:29 -0500
Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have to disagree. These are legitimate purposes for collection, as well
> as for disclosure.
>
> Greg
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Stephanie Perrin <
> stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca > wrote:
>
> > I filled it out, but I am afraid for most of the purposes I could not
> > agree. We do not *collect *data for many of those purposes. We disclose
> > it to people for those purposes, but the purpose of collecting those data
> > elements is not for tax collection, trademark enforcement actions, etc.
> > This is the conflation issue I have raised repeatedly.
> >
> > Apologies if I did not make that point clear enough on the call.
> >
> > Stephanie Perrin
> >
> > On 2017-01-20 17:35, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> >
> > Please note that our current poll ends in about 24 hours. So far only 16
> > people have responded.
> >
> >
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-
> > bounces@icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org >] *On Behalf Of *Lisa
> > Phifer
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 18, 2017 1:50 PM
> > *To:* RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org>
> > *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Now open: 18 January Poll on
> > Purpose
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > As directed in the 18 January WG call, this week's new Poll on Purpose is
> > now open for WG member participation:
> >
> > https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SZX9QJZ
> >
> > A PDF of this poll's questions and notes/recordings of the meeting are
> > posted on the 18 January meeting page: https://community.icann.org/x/
> > EbTDAw
> >
> > This poll will close at *COB Saturday 21 January 2017*.
> >
> > All WG members are encouraged to participate in this poll to help advance
> > deliberation and prepare for next week's meeting.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Lisa
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________ > > gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing listgnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.
orghttps://mm.icann.org/ mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp- wg
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
> >
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg