March 2011 - Rt4-whois - lists.icann.org

Call for public comment
by Emily Taylor March 5, 2011

March 5, 2011

Hi Alice Sarmad spotted an anomaly between the published version and the one that we asked to be published. Please can you investigate and ensure that the correct version is published. Thanks. It doesn't have the lines wrt WHOIS data.... etc or the Feedback request from the community which asks about whether the definition is too broad or narrow. People - I note the dialogue on the list regarding consumers, and the strong views on both sides. Can I respectfully suggest that we continue with the public comment, which is not our final position, and asks for feedback on exactly this issue, and review where we are in the light of the comments received. We will be revisiting the concepts of consumer and consumer trust at our next meeting. I'm fully expecting us to start finding disagreements on these key issues, and am hopeful that with the benefit of further face to face discussion we will be able to find some formulations that we are more comfortable with. Kind regards Emily 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor(a)etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk

1 0

Fwd: ICANN News Alert -- WHOIS Review Team - Call for Public Comment
by Dr.Sarmad Hussain March 5, 2011

March 5, 2011

The definitions of Consumer, which we are working so hard on, seem to be missing from this public call! regards, Sarmad ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org> Date: Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:10 AM Subject: ICANN News Alert -- WHOIS Review Team - Call for Public Comment To: sarmad.hussain(a)kics.edu.pk [image: ICANN] <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-04mar11-en.htm ------------------------------ WHOIS Review Team – Call for Public Comment 4 March 2011 The WHOIS Policy Review Team<https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/WHOIS+Policy+Review+Team>was launched in October 2010 in line with the Affirmation of Commitments<http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm>(AoC) provisions, section 9.3.1, which stipulates that: "ICANN additionally commits to enforcing its existing policy relating to WHOIS, subject to applicable laws. Such existing policy requires that ICANN implement measures to maintain timely, unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete WHOIS information, including registrant, technical, billing, and administrative contact information. One year from the effective date of this document and then no less frequently than every three years thereafter, ICANN will organize a review of WHOIS policy and its implementation to assess the extent to which WHOIS policy is effective and its implementation meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement and promotes consumer trust." http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm The WHOIS policy Review Team (WHOIS RT) is composed of ten SO/AC representatives, two independent experts, one Law Enforcement representative, the ICANN President and CEO (Selector)'s designated nominee and the Chair of the GAC (Selector)'s designated nominee. For full reference, please consult: http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/composition-4-en.htm The WHOIS Review Team held its first formal face-to-face meeting in London, January 2011, and agreed on a scope of work, road map, action plan and outreach plan. We submit these materials to the Community for review, input and comment. Further, on the substantive issues, the WHOIS Review Team's first tasks have been to define key terms from its 9.3.1 section of Affirmation of Commitments scope. The WHOIS Review Team would welcome *public comment<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201104-en.htm#whois-rt> * on the following issues: *What is a "consumer"?* There is no single universally agreed definition of 'consumer', and legal definitions in different jurisdictions vary widely. Some are narrow and limited to 'natural persons', while others are broader and include various types of organisations. The WHOIS review team has been considering a broad interpretation of the term 'consumer', as this would allow a broad range of perspectives to be considered by the review team. This appears to be consistent with the intention of the drafters of the AoC. In the global sense, "consumer" may mean: And specifically within the context of this review, a "consumer" w.r.t. WHOIS data and WHOIS Service may mean: *Feedback request from community* Community feedback is desired on the WHOIS Review Team's approach to this definition. Is it too broad or too restrictive? In either case, how should it be changed? 1. Scope of Work and Roadmap https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Scope+and+Roadmap+of+the+WH… 2. Outreach Plan https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Outreach+plan 3. Action Plan https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Action+plan 4. List of Key Definitions 1. Law Enforcement: Law Enforcement shall be considered to be an entity authorized by a government and whose responsibilities include the maintenance, co-ordination, or enforcement of laws, multi-national treaty or government-imposed legal obligations. 2. Applicable Laws: Includes any and all local and national laws that regulate and/or control the collection, use, access, and disclosure of personally identifiable information. It may also include other relevant legal obligations, including U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the U.N. Guidelines for the Regulation of Computerized Personal Data Files. 3. Producers and Maintainers of WHOIS Data: 1. Producers: The individuals or organizations supplying contact data for inclusion into WHOIS data. 2. Maintainers: The WHOIS Review Team proposes to subdivide this category in to: - Data Controllers: Individuals or organizations that define the data to be collected, require its release, and govern its use. May or may not be directly involved in these functions. - Data Processors: Individuals or organizations engaged in the collection, storage, and release of data, according to the terms defined by the Data Controller. They do -not- determine the nature or use of the data that they collect or maintain. 4. Consumer: - All Internet users including natural persons, commercial and non-commercial entities, government and academic entities. - Any consumer that acts as a Producer of WHOIS data (see above), Maintainer of WHOIS data and provider of WHOIS Service (e.g. Registrars), or User of WHOIS data (e.g. individuals, commercial or non-commercial entities who legitimately query the WHOIS data). The WHOIS Review Team also welcomes general comments on the above issues, and any other issues which you would like us to consider at this early stage in our work. The ICANN San Francisco meeting takes place during our comment period and we will be reaching out to the Community. The WHOIS Review Team will hold a public session on Wednesday 16 February 2011 at 11 am – 12 noon in the Elizabethan A-C meeting room: http://svsf40.icann.org/node/22173. We hold a full day face-to-face meeting on Sunday, 13 March which is public and silent observers are welcome to join us: http://svsf40.icann.org/node/21983. Finally, we will be meeting with Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees in San Francisco and Singapore ICANN meetings (and to arrange a meeting please contact Alice Jansen, alice.jansen(a)icann.org) To find minutes of our meetings as well as documents and work in progress, please check our public community wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/WHOIS+Policy+Review+Team Thank you for taking the time to consider these issues and documents. Your participation is essential to the success of the review, and your comments<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201104-en.htm#whois-rt>will be carefully considered. This message was sent to sarmad.hussain(a)kics.edu.pk from: ICANN | 4676 Admiralty Way Suite 330 | Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6601 Email Marketing by [image: iContact - Try It Free!]<http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=9827817&l=6333&s=KABZ&m=348…>

2 1

Re: [Rt4-whois] Definition of Consumer
by James M. Bladel March 5, 2011

March 5, 2011

3 2

Definition of Consumer
by Susan Kawaguchi March 5, 2011

March 5, 2011

Hello All, I can appreciate the work that went into defining the term "consumer" in these two ways but I am adamant that we do not limit our definition of consumer to the use of WHOIS. When we look at the term Consumer along with the term Trust we need to insure that we are looking at all internet users and not just registrants and a small number of informed internet users. These two groups are a small percentage of the overall number of internet users. If we send these two definitions out to the community for comment and they come back with the opinion that we should only use the WHOIS specific definition of consumer we will be limited in our work. In the global sense, "consumer" may mean: * All Internet users including natural persons, commercial and non-commercial entities, government and academic entities, And specifically within the context of this review, a "consumer" w.r.t. WHOIS data and Whois Service may mean: * Any consumer that acts as a Producer of WHOIS data (see above), Maintainer of WHOIS data and Provider of Whois Service (e.g. Registrars), OR User of WHOIS data (e.g. individuals, commercial or non-commercial entities who legitimately query the WHOIS data.). Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Inc. 1601 California Avenue Palo Alto, CA Phone - 650 485-6064 Cell - 650 387 3904 Please note my email address has changed to skawaguchi(a)fb.com NOTICE: This email (including any attachments) may contain information that is private, confidential, or protected by attorney-client or other privilege. Unless you are the intended recipient, you may not use, copy, or retransmit the email or its contents.

2 1

Re: [Rt4-whois] Proposed Definition: "Consumer" [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
by Nettlefold, Peter March 4, 2011

March 4, 2011

Hello again all, I’ve just been looking on the review team’s public wiki, and noticed a few things that I think should be amended and discussed. I’m hesitant to put these changes into the wiki without the agreement of the review team as a whole. 1. I see that the recently adopted definition of law enforcement has been added to the wiki. Thank you to Alice for that. However, I note that the page has a table that was not discussed, or agreed on, during our call. I would suggest that this table be removed, at least until the review team has had a chance to discuss it. 2. I note that the applicable laws definition has not been updated since our call. Similarly, the definition of producers and maintainers. Can these now be updated with our agreed definitions? 3. I have just noticed that the proposed ‘consumer trust’ survey is also on the wiki. I think that if we’re going to stakeholders on this, we should carefully consider the best way to do this. My view is that that open questions give stakeholders a better opportunity to put their views across and explain their thinking. For this reason, I raised concerns with the current closed and quantitative survey. I had thought that the review team agreed to discuss this further before its release. As it would be desirable to avoid confusing stakeholders with several different surveys, I suggest that the survey on the wiki be removed until the review team has a chance to substantively discuss it. 4. I also note that there is a questionnaire hosted under the ‘outreach plan’ tab. I do recall some email traffic about this questionnaire, and I’m sorry if I missed this while I was on leave, but I do not recall the review team agreeing to it. I see that it has very detailed questions, and explicitly states that it is from ‘the review team’. While I’m not opposed to the questionnaire as such (although I do have queries about some of the questions, and note that it uses old definitions etc), I would ask whether this is/was intended to be separate from the consumer trust survey? My point about multiple surveys (in point 3 above) would seem to apply here. I am concerned about the process for posting documents on the wiki, particularly when they are posted in the name of the review team as a whole. Perhaps this could be briefly discussed in San Francisco? Kind regards, Peter From: Nettlefold, Peter Sent: Friday, 4 March 2011 9:40 AM To: 'lynn(a)goodsecurityconsulting.com'; Dr. Sarmad Hussain Cc: 'RT4 WHOIS' Subject: RE: [Rt4-whois] Proposed Definition: "Consumer" [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Hi all, Sorry for the slow reply, but I also think this is a good basis for our consultation. I have two brief comments: 1. I think we need an ‘or’ in the WHOIS consumer category list, rather than an ‘and’ (otherwise it would be a very high bar indeed to be considered to be a consumer). I’ve made that change below in capitals so it stands out. 2. I’m not sure what is meant by a ‘provider’. I note that this isn’t a category we’ve used in the ‘Producers and Maintainers’ definition that we’ve agreed to go forward with. So, is there an example of a ‘provider’ that is not captured under the ‘maintainer’ definition? If so, do we need to revisit our ‘Producers and Maintainers’ definition? Also, and just for the future, I think it was Kathy (?) that noted on our call that one sleeper in this formulation is the word ‘legitimately’ (and the inherent reference to its converse: ‘illegitimate’). It will be interesting to see what the public comment returns on this, as this will be one (of the many) issues we will need to focus on in some detail going forward. Cheers, Peter From: rt4-whois-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of lynn(a)goodsecurityconsulting.com Sent: Thursday, 3 March 2011 3:10 AM To: Dr. Sarmad Hussain Cc: 'RT4 WHOIS' Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Proposed Definition: "Consumer" Thank you Dr. Sarmad! I like this last edited draft and would be happy to have this published for public comment. Lynn -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Proposed Definition: "Consumer" From: "Dr. Sarmad Hussain" <sarmad(a)cantab.net<mailto:sarmad@cantab.net>> Date: Wed, March 02, 2011 4:55 am To: "'James M. Bladel'" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>>, "'RT4 WHOIS'" <rt4-whois(a)icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org>> Ok, though with minor wording adjustments; see below. From: rt4-whois-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 12:21 PM To: RT4 WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Proposed Definition: "Consumer" Team: As discussed during our call, here is the proposed bifurcated definition of "consumer" for inclusion in our call for comments. It has been chopped up a bit for readability, but I did endeavor to preserve the overall meaning. I've also modified the "Feedback Requested" to be more open ended. Thoughts / feeedback? I'm off to bed now, but will check back in a few hours. Thanks-- J. _________________________________ In the global sense, "consumer" may mean: * All Internet users including natural persons, commercial and non-commercial entities, government and academic entities, And specifically within the context of this review, a "consumer" w.r.t. WHOIS data and Whois Service may mean: * Any consumer that acts as a Producer of WHOIS data (see above), Maintainer of WHOIS data and Provider of Whois Service (e.g. Registrars), OR User of WHOIS data (e.g. individuals, commercial or non-commercial entities who legitimately query the WHOIS data.). Feedback request from community Community feedback is desired on the WHOIS Review Team's approach to this definition. Is it too broad or too restrictive? In either case, how should it be changed. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3475 - Release Date: 03/02/11 00:34:00 ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois(a)icann.org<mailto:Rt4-whois@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Security Advisor of the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, 38 Sydney Ave, Forrest ACT 2603, telephone (02) 6271-1376 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4 3

Re: [Rt4-whois] Proposed Definition: "Consumer"
by lynn＠goodsecurityconsulting.com March 4, 2011

March 4, 2011

4 4

Adobe Room
by Alice Jansen March 2, 2011

March 2, 2011

Dear Review Team Members, Please be kindly reminded to join the Adobe Connect room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/ No password required – please enter as "guest". Thanks, Best regards Alice

2 3

Re: [Rt4-whois] Proposed Definition: "Consumer"
by James M. Bladel March 2, 2011

March 2, 2011

1 0

Proposed Definition: "Consumer"
by James M. Bladel March 2, 2011

March 2, 2011

3 2

Re: [Rt4-whois] Law enforcement definition
by lynn＠goodsecurityconsulting.com March 2, 2011

March 2, 2011

2 1