Thanks for the good work.

Norbert Klein

=

Milton Mueller wrote:

>This would be the final draft, to be sent to the Task Force and GNSO.
>Note that the only dissent is recognized in the statement. (sec. 2)
>
>=====
>
>Statement of the Noncommercial Users Constituency on Whois Task Force
>1/2 Recommendation:
>Improving Notification and Consent for the Use of Contact Data in the
>Whois Service
>
>1. Constituency position
>Noncommercial domain name users welcome efforts to ensure that domain
>name registrants are better informed about the publication of their
>private contact information via the Whois system. Public, anonymous
>access to private contact information poses a number of risks to
>registrants and may violate their rights to privacy. Until this
>situation is reformed, conspicuous notification is essential.
>
>The text we reviewed contains an error. Under point 3, the sentence
>"Registrars must obtain a separate acknowledgement from registrars that
>they have read and understand these disclosures" should read
>"Registrars
>must obtain a separate acknowledgement from _registrants_ that they
>have read and understand these disclosures."
>
>NCUC strongly supports the requirement to set aside the notification
>and to require a distinct and separate acknowledgement from registrants
>that they are aware of the exposure of their private information. We
>observe, however, that for customers registering multiple domain names
>in the same transaction, only one such acknowledgement should be
>required. The constituency would like to make sure that the same
>notification and acknowledgement should take place during renewals.
>
>We strongly support the statement "The wording of the notice provided
>by registrars should, to the extent feasible, be uniform." Because of
>the highly competitive nature of the registrar business, registrars have
>an incentive to downplay or obscure the privacy implications of
>registering a domain name because they fear it may deter customers from
>signing up. The specific wording of the notification, therefore, should
>not be left to the discretion of registrars. We suggest that the wording
>be developed by staff subject to the approval of the GNSO Council, and
>translated as literally as possible into different languages by an
>independent party. This language should then be incorporated into the
>Registrar Accreditation Agreement.
>
>2. Method for Reaching Agreement on NCUC position
>
>NCUC's Chair drafted and circulated via email a constituency
>statementon its discussion list, soliciting input from its members. A
>minor addition to the draft, concerning renewals, was suggested and
>agreed and incorporated into the constituency statement. All comments
>were supportive except for one, which emphasized the additional burden
>on registrants of the additional process.
>
>3. Impact on Constituency.
>While there is some recognition that the registration process might be
>slightly more complicated as a result of the proposed change, all member
>organizations but one considered the benefits of more prominent
>notification and registrant awareness to outweigh any burden.
>
>
>
>Dr. Milton Mueller
>Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>http://www.digital-convergence.org
>http://www.internetgovernance.org
>
>
>
>