Hi Holly:
Yes indeed.  I read the entire speech 'as prepared for delivery'.

While the gentleman did not specifically refer collection, he did go straight to the heart of the access question. The fighting words are 'easy access' for everybody, including lowly Internet end users. 

So you note the way he contextualized WHOIS - by use cases! -  and there is no question he was making the case for continued 'easy access' to personal data.

At least that's the way I read it.

Best,
-Carlton


==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote:
Hi Carlton

Agree in one sense, and yes, this could be pushback on the requirements.  But what he doesn’t do is distinguish between what is actually collected and what is accessed - by whom and in what circumstances.  For what is collected, yes, the data minimisation principle will apply. But that necessarily includes contact information, for legitimate purposes in just managing the DNS. It is who accesses and under what circumstances that is the issue.  And in that regard, please read Scott’s latest email on the viability of controlling access by authenticated/certified parties.

Happy reading

Holly


On 30 Jan 2018, at 9:31 am, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:

...never mind the GDPR purists, says our Uncle Sam.  

https://domainnamewire.com/2018/01/29/u-s-gov-whois-info-must-remain-available/

-Carlton


==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================
_______________________________________________
registration-issues-wg mailing list
registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg