Thanks to all. Glad to see the response. You have my support. Lou On 1/14/2013 1:33 PM, Robin Gross wrote: > Thanks, Amr. FYI: It is the NCSG Policy Committee, which decides to > endorse statements on behalf of NCSG. It would be great if the > NCSG-PC could agree to endorse this statement before the deadline (or > suggest any changes to it). > > Thanks again! > Robin > > > On Jan 14, 2013, at 9:24 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > >> Thanks Kathy and Roy. If there are any more comments that members >> would like included, please post them today. The next Thick Whois WG >> call is scheduled for tomorrow at 15:00 UTC (right before the NCSG >> Policy meeting). We will need to submit our response to the WG prior >> to this call. >> >> It would also be great if NPOC could endorse the response, making it >> a response by NCSG instead of NCUC. As far as I know, NPOC has not >> submitted anything so far. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr >> >> On Jan 14, 2013, at 7:15 PM, Balleste, Roy wrote: >> >>> Hello! >>> Kathy was kind enough to unify all responses so far, I have (with >>> her consent) unified mine with all others. >>> Please find attached. >>> *Roy Balleste, J.S.D.* >>> *Professor of Law* >>> *Law Library Director* >>> *St. Thomas University* >>> *16401 NW 37th Avenue* >>> *Miami Gardens, FL 33054 USA* >>> *1-305-623-2341* >>> *From:*NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]]*On Behalf >>> Of*Kathy Kleiman >>> *Sent:*Sunday, January 13, 2013 10:05 PM >>> *To:*[log in to unmask] >>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >>> *Subject:*[NCSG-Discuss] Thick Whois WG Comments - with some >>> proposed edits >>> >>> *Hi All,* >>> >>> *Great thanks to Amr for the first draft of comments to the Thick >>> Whois PDP Working Group. As you know, the question on the table is >>> whether a “thick Whois model” – one in which all Whois data is held >>> and made available by the Registry (e.g., Verisign) and not the >>> Registrar – should be the model for all existing and all new gTLDs.* >>> *For .COM, it's a huge issue. It is a “thin” registry, and 100 >>> million+ Whois records are stored by the registrar pursuant to local >>> laws (including local privacy and free speech laws). Whether we can >>> convert these 100 million+ records to a single database – and >>> whether we want to – are questions for this group.* >>> >>> *Further, the issue of “Whois” data, service and protocol are >>> all up in the air. If someday we reach agreement that this very >>> personal data – that can expose individuals and organizations to >>> threat for what they say and share online (including political, >>> religious and ethnic minority views and dissent, including >>> non-commercial activity) – should be private, then a single >>> centralized Registry Whois database creates a single point of >>> access. That means that should Registries be cozy with their >>> local governments, all of this data may be relinquished without >>> due process, or even subject to criminal laws that are >>> non-standard in the world (e.g., Syria, N.Korea, China).* >>> >>> *The fact is that registrants know their registrars and it is to >>> their registrars that the Whois information is provided. Most >>> registrants will think they are protected under those rules. >>> Despite the fact that New gTLDs (for this round, at least) >>> require a centralized Whois – with the Registry – I remain >>> deeply concerned about the consolidation of the massive .COM >>> Whois (if it's even legal – see below) and the standard set for >>> all future registries and TLDs – regardless of their political, >>> social, or religious uses.* >>> >>> * >>> If NPOC shares these concerns, I urge you to sign on – with thanks! >>> >>> Best, Kathy Kleiman (veteran of far too many Whois task forces and >>> review teams...) >>> p.s. All of Amr's comments kept, and I added on and filled in some >>> sections...* >>> <Edits to Thick Whois PDP WG Initial Comments.2.doc> >> > > > > > 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] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > > >