Thanks, Carlton. I agree it's time to act as well, but my goal here is practical politics. It looks to me like at least some of these studies are going ahead, regardless of whether the at-large (or the NCUC) feels WHOIS has been studied to death or not. I want to encourage us to prioritize the studies that appear to be focused most on "consumer" and end-user issues. I do not believe users hold privacy more dear than the dream of an Internet that functions according to the terms of binding agreements with registrars. The documents are heavy going, I agree. That's why I recommend ALAC adopt "GAC 3" as its sort of working statement on WHOIS: "There are technical measures available that would effectively curtail misuse of data published on WHOIS databases while preserving legitimate use and open access to the databases." Though that statement is missing a critical element, in my opinion, which is improving the quality of WHOIS data and enforcing existing provisions in the RAA on WHOIS (which are points covered in some of the other studies on the list), if GAC 3 goes forward, and reasonable evidence of its truth be found, would it not come close to settling the division between the two WHOIS camps? -----Original Message----- From: alac-internal-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-internal-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlton Samuels Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 12:20 PM To: ALAC Internal List Cc: Liz Gasster; NA Discuss Subject: Re: [ALAC-Internal] WHOIS studies Beau: Having spent time trying to digest the Hypotheses document, I tend to agree with your ranking for Area #1. Thereafter, it becomes a fuzzy model, to be treated almost like a self-organising system. My time in the academic environment has left me cold to committees and the real prospect of "analysis paralysis". Yes, I intuitively understand the contextual framework here. We have collectively decided that having data that informs knowledge-enabled action is the key thing, hence the WHOIS data requirement and the studies. Bottomline, we must have that dataset right. To my mind, it would have been far more simple to set a bar for collection, storage, protection and dissemination of WHOIS data - which is clearly in ICANN's remit - and make conformance to these conditional for doing business with ICANN. We know that there are entities that misuse that WHOIS data. And misuse is presumably based on some settled standard. Reason and outcome dictate we should discourage misuse and enforce sanctions against those who insist on misuse. The laws, equity and regulations are useful and applicable here. The base requirement for conformance then is a law - or set of laws - and rules that will enable enforcement. This is where the interests of the nation states intervene. Or, rather, intersect. But with respect to the WHOIS data, it is the final custodian that has the duty to declare the rules and the laws pertaining misuse. This looks like a treaty situation to me. Finally, in the words of [former Secretary of Defence] Rumsfeld, there are the "unknown unknows". This is perhaps the only thing he's ever said that I'm in agreement. Those will have to remain on hold until such time as they are revealed. Enough of the studies. It is time to act. Carlton On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Brendler, Beau <Brenbe@consumer.org>wrote:

Colleagues...

Based on my organization's own research into WHOIS issues, and my understanding and experience of the related issues, here is how I recommend the ALAC submit its priority list for WHOIS studies (see meeting announcement below). There is a scale also for feasibility, which I left blank for two reasons: 1) I don't necessarily have the expertise to determine which studies are feasible or not; 2) All these studies look feasible to me, feasibility being primarily in this case cooperation of the registrar community (and possibly the law enforcement community) in providing usable data.

Area 1: Number Suggested Rank of Priority 1 5 14 5 15 2 21/GAC 2 4 GAC 3 1

Area 2: Number Suggested Rank of Priority 16 3 22 2 23 5 GAC 12-15 2 24 1

Area 3: Number Suggested Rank of Priority 2 5 5 5 GAC 7 1

Area4: Number Suggested Rank of Priority 17 1 18, 19, GAC 9 & GAC 10 2

Area 5: Number Suggested Rank of Priority 6 1 GAC 1 1 13 & GAC 11 1 GAC 2 2

Area 6: Number Suggested Rank of Priority 3 2 Metalitz 3 20 4 12 2

Area 7: Number Suggested Rank of Priority 8 2 11 3 GAC 4 2 GAC 5 2 GAC 6 Combine with GAC 5 ________________________________ From: Heidi Ullrich [mailto:Heidi.Ullrich@icann.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 9:31 PM To: Cheryl Langdon-Orr; carlosaguirre62@hotmail.com; Sébastien Bachollet; Brendler, Beau; patrick@vande-walle.eu; hawadiakite@gmail.com; mbashir@mbash.net; Alan Greenberg; nguyenthuhue@gmail.com; Gareth Shearman; ajp@glocom.ac.jp; jsalgueiro@cantv.net; Vanda Scartezini UOL; Fatimata Seye Sylla; vivekvc2001@yahoo.co.in Cc: Nick Ashton-Hart; Matthias Langenegger Subject: INVITATION: WHOIS BRIEFING BY LIZ GASSTER THURSDAY 22 JAN 20:30-21:30 UTC

Dear All,

Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor for the GNSO, has offered to participate in a teleconference on WHOIS. The results of the doodle in which 6 out of 7 people voted indicated that Thursday, 22 January at 20:30-21:30 UTC would be the best time. Please find participation instructions under:

https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?how_can_i_participate_in_this _meeting .

If there is interest for French or Spanish interpretation for this meeting, please contact us as soon as possible. Please note, however, that we can not guarantee interpretation for this meeting due to time constraints.

As a reminder, participants will be asked to engage in a discussion to rank the WHOIS issues that were presented at the last ALAC meeting by priorities. Please find further information on the WHOIS priority issues under:

https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?alac_whois_discussion_13_january_2 009

Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White, Marie-Helene Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff@atlarge.icann.org

*** Scanned

** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system. _______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal_atlarge- lists.icann.org

ALAC Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac At-Large <http://st.icann.org/alacAt-Large> Website: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal_atlarge-lists.... ALAC Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac At-Large Website: http://atlarge.icann.org *** Scanned ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.