>>> Danny Younger <[log in to unmask]> 3/5/2007 10:41 AM >>>
>(3) Determine what data collected should be available
>for public access in the context of the purpose of
>WHOIS. Determine how to access data that is not
>available for public access. 

>The access issue has not been addressed by the TF. 
>Wrapping up the TF efforts without even considering
>tiered access or other proposals is irresponsible.

It is irresponsible for you to say that. The report does "consider"
tiered access and other proposals. They raise enormous issues that could
not be resolved in the space of this TF. 

What you are conveniently over looking in your solicitude for the
trademark interests is that there is a long discussion in the report of
the fact that current legal methods, such as subpeonas, allow law
enforcement to attain access to ANY data held by registrars, including
Whois. Registrars are constantly responding to those requests today.
That is the default solution. 

If you want to move beyond that, it is possible to propose and dicsuss
tiering mechanisms in another TF. But the old-fashioned, constitionally
based idea that if the police want private information they have to ask
for it based on a warrant or subpeona is not such a bad thing, is it?
Unless, of course, your real agenda is to retain the status quo by
paralyzing the policy process.