Hi Everyone - I've created a page dedicated to WHOIS comments on our public voice web site (www.thepublicvoice.org). If you have a moment, go to http://www.thepublicvoice.org/take_action/default.html and take a look. I'm going to send out e-mail soliciting comments for each TF and will use this page for their reference, so let me know if you have any suggestions/modifications. Chun, thank you for your thoughts regarding TF3. I very much agree and would appreciate anyone's help with comments on the Registrar's document. I'll send something soon. Thank you, Frannie >Dear Frannie Wellings and all others, > >I have just read the preliminary report of TF3. >As you had implied, it is purely IPC's declaration rather than a report >for public comment. My feeling is that ICANN seems to be a place where all >people should be tested on how long all interest groups keep their >position without any compromise and looking for an appropriate time >to make big voice in taking chair or making draft document. > >As Thomas Roessler mentioned and Ross Rader reiterated, the best practice >part has never reflected all prior inputs and outcomes come out throughout >long discussion on this sensitive issue. Moreover, that part seems to be >very offensive and too regulatory. I was shocked that the versification >process of a domain name accuracy could be similar to being investigated >due to some possible serious crime. > >Registrar's alternate text is very well worked out, although it still >holds to impose some sanction on those registrants who intentionally deny >to provide correct contact point information. I think we could advance >further if we could successfully make out the corrected or commented >version on Registrar's alternate text. > >Then, when I tried to make some comments, I could not find out where it >could be done, and no comments at the designated URL. Has not yet opened >the public comment period? > >Still, I have not yet read TF 1,2 preliminary reports. And its volume size >is too thick. Anyhow, I believe Kathy and Milton could have done an >excellent job. > > >regards, > >Chun > > >On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Frannie Wellings wrote: > >> Harold, Kathy and all NCUC folks - >> I'm glad we're talking about outreach. We (EPIC) are going to try >> and recruit public comment to these Task Forces through the GILC list >> (Global Internet Liberties Campaign), EDRi (European Digital Rights >> Initiative), TACD, the Privacy Coalition, and other lists/groups. >> We'll really need help getting comments submitted, especially in Task >> Force 3 (summary of TF 3 progress below). Kathy, I would like to do >> a conference call. Harold, if you or anyone else on the list has >> ideas for other groups to contact about this please let us know. >> Regarding TF3, I'm going to send to these lists the Preliminary >> Report and an alternative to the Best Practices section which was >> submitted by the Registrars constituency. That alternative is still >> not as privacy friendly as we would like, but is much better than the >> one included in the Report. I'm hoping we'll get a lot of comments >> submitted on that version, giving it some legitimacy and pulling the >> document as a whole to the left - or whatever radical side it may be >> :). Our document isn't as long as TF2's, but I know they can be >> tedious, so we can draft some sample comments for people if that >> helps. It is tough to get people interested in these detailed >> policy issues and tough to make it all understandable, though I think >> you're right Harold that this is an area people could be attracted to. >> Anyway, hope everyone's well. - Frannie >> >> >> To update you on Task Force 3: >> Bottom line, our document stinks. The report itself shows that we >> got no results to our surveys, and therefore no data to make any >> policy recommendations. This was a good thing! However, at the last >> minute the IP constituency drafted a Best Practices section - we'd > > argued against it saying no data collection meant we were unable to >> recommend Best Practices. We voted on Thursday/Friday on this >> trickier part of the document, just the Best Practices section. A >> rep from the IP constituency is chairing our task force and he really >> refused to take reasonable input to amend this document significantly >> before the vote. >> So, I'd been working with Ross Rader from the Registrars constituency >> to get an alternate document submitted for public comment. We needed >> to vote down the IP document. We had the votes of the At-Large as >> well and just needed the Registries. We thought we had the >> Registries vote - we were calling everyone we knew to try and sway >> that vote, but in the end they abstained from certain parts of the >> document, but voted yes on some points, unfortunately passing that >> draft as a whole for public comment. >> Now we're in a situation were we have to reframe this discussion and >> are going to rely heavily on public comment. On our last TF call, I >> said that given this task force's reluctance to accept constituency >> reps input, I didn't see what would change in terms of adjusting the >> document as a response to the public comment. What's resulted is >> that I'm in charge of reviewing, etc. all public comments and >> summarizing for our task force. So... I really need many NCUC >> submissions. >> I'll send out to the lists above the text of the current best >> practices and the alternative document from the Registrars. >> Let me know what you think, but I think I'll see if we can get >> comments shooting down the current Best Practices section entirely >> and commenting on how we would like to change the registrars >> document. If we work from that one, at least we have a couple of >> constituencies to support it, and possibly the Registries. >> >> >>Whois Task Force 3 Preliminary report can be viewed here >> >>(alternative Best Practices section is near the end. >> >>http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/TF3PreliminaryWithRCMR1.pdf >> >> >> >>Comments for the Whois Task Force 3 Preliminary Report can be >>submitted to: >> >>[log in to unmask] >> >>The archive of comments for this report is available at: >> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/whois-tf3-report-comments. >> >> >> At 03:06 PM -0400 06.01.2004, Harold Feld wrote: >> >Kathy, my thanks for your tireless and excellent work on this issue. >> > >> >To the rest of us: >> >To what extent, if any, are the organizations in the NCUC reaching out >> >on this issue to other organizations? This is an issue of enormous >> >public importance. Organizations and individuals that generally do not >> >care about "DNS policy" or "Internet governance" may care about this. >> >In the United States in particular, this may have great value for >> >educating U.S. policymakers and Federal agencies that are pushing for >> >"thick" registries without consideration of the social cost. >> > >> >I hope we will all seek to spread word to our colleagues about both the >> >ICANN process and uses of the report for broader public interest activties. >> > >> >Harold Feld >> > >> >[log in to unmask] wrote: >> > >> >>The WHOIS Task Force 2 report is now published by the GNSO Council for >> >>comment (until June 17th). It is posted at >> >>http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/TF2%20Initial%20Report3.pdf. >> >> >> >>Would anyone like to have a conference call to talk about the report >> >>and great value of filing some short comments? >> >> >> >>Also: comments on TF2 report go to >> >>"[log in to unmask]" >> >>The archive of comments for this report is available at: >> >>http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/whois-tf2-report-comments. >> >> >> >>Kathy >> >>\ >> >> >> -- >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> Frannie Wellings >> Policy Analyst, Electronic Privacy Information Center >> Coordinator, The Public Voice >> 1718 Connecticut Ave. N.W., Suite 200 >> Washington, D.C. 20009 USA >> [log in to unmask] >> +1 202 483 1140 extension 107 (telephone) >> +1 202 483 1248 (fax) >> http://www.epic.org > > http://www.thepublicvoice.org >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------ >Chun Eung Hwi >General Secretary, PeaceNet | phone: (+82) 2-2166-2205 >Seoul Yangchun P.O.Box 81 | pcs: (+82) 019-259-2667 >Seoul, 158-600, Korea | eMail: [log in to unmask] >------------------------------------------------------------ -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Frannie Wellings Policy Analyst, Electronic Privacy Information Center Coordinator, The Public Voice 1718 Connecticut Ave. N.W., Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20009 USA [log in to unmask] +1 202 483 1140 extension 107 (telephone) +1 202 483 1248 (fax) http://www.epic.org http://www.thepublicvoice.org -----------------------------------------------------------------