Begin forwarded message: > From: Liz Gasster <[log in to unmask]> > Date: February 25, 2008 5:26:55 PM PST > To: Council GNSO <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: [council] Report on public suggestions of further studies > of WHOIS > > All, > > You may recall that when the GNSO Council decided last October in > LA to terminate the pending PDP on WHOIS, you also decided to > solicit public opinions about the types of future studies that > might be conducted on WHOIS, to inform future policy development. > You may also recall that the 31 October resolution asks staff to > prepare a summary of the submissions received (amended to request > by February 25), and the Council would then provide additional > definition regarding potential data gathering and study > requirements. Staff would then provide the Council with rough cost > estimates for various components of data gathering and studies as > requested by the Council. Based on those cost estimates, the > Council will decide what data gathering and studies would be > pursued; and 4) staff will perform the resulting data gathering and > studies and report the results back to the Council. > > The public comment period closed on 15 February, and attached is a > summary and analysis of the public comments we received (25 total) > that I’ve compiled with the considerable help of an expert > consultant, Lorrie Faith Cranor. Dr. Cranor is a professor of > computer science at Carnegie Mellon U. and an expert researcher on > Internet privacy, security and related issues, and we are fortunate > to have her expertise to review and collate study suggestions. > > > > As you consider next steps, I do want to point out that in the > attached summary, we have grouped proposed studies according to the > following topic areas: > > > > 1. WHOIS misuse > > 2. Compliance with data protection laws and registrar > accreditation agreements > > 3. Availability of privacy services > > 4. Demand and motivation for use of privacy services > > 5. Impact of WHOIS data protection on crime and abuse > > 6. Proxy registrar compliance with law enforcement and > dispute resolution requests > > 7. WHOIS data accuracy > > > > You may find it useful to first consider which of the groupings > address questions you think that having data about would inform the > debate. Once you have identified which questions you want to > answer, then you could focus on only those particular groupings and > consider which study approach (or combination of approaches) will > best answer your questions. In some cases Lorrie has indicated that > the different studies answer slightly different questions. In some > cases she indicates that some of the approaches are likely to give > better data, or that some of the approaches are likely to be less > expensive. When you think about the fundamental questions asked by > each grouping, you may find it more useful to consider the > questions asked by each grouping as follows: > > > > 1. How big is the WHOIS misuse problem that may need to be > solved? > > 2. Is there a non-compliance with data protection laws > problem that needs to be solved? > > 3. Are there already market-driven solutions available? > > 4. Is there demand for market-driven solutions, and are they > being used for legitimate or illegitimate purposes? > > 5. Do WHOIS data protections lead to abuse and misuse? > > 6. Are provisions for providing protected WHOIS data to law > enforcement for investigation of crime and abuse effective? > > 7. Is WHOIS data accurate? > > > > I note also that several of the proposed studies are being > recommended to address questions of WHOIS accuracy and compliance > and I have also shared this summary with ICANN’s compliance > director and deputy general counsel. They may have further views > that we will share as appropriate. Lastly, if you would find it > useful, Dr. Cranor can be available to participate in an upcoming > call to discuss the report and answer questions. > > > > Thanks, Liz > > >  IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]