RDS/WHOIS 2 Review Team Comments/ALAC Mechanisms

[Mueller, Milton L]

John,
First I’d like to thank you for weighing in on behalf of NARALO. We need to foster more discussion of this between At Large and NCSG.  I know you are a reasonable person, too, so I’d like to address this chasm between ALAC and NCSG with you directly.

Having worked with the At Large representatives on the EPDP now for several months, I have been deeply disappointed in how poorly they represent real privacy interests and how totally their positions are aligned with those of the intellectual property and business interests. It seems they simply do not take into account the privacy and confidentiality interests of internet users who have registered domains, nor do they seem especially interested in the problem of compliance with data protection law.

Unfortunately your comments reinforce this impression. Let me go through the arguments you make one by one.


1.       Open Whois data protects the privacy interests of individual internet users because it helps keep those who operate web sites accountable.

John, this is a terribly weak argument. Ordinary users simply don’t use Whois, that was proven in studies ICANN did in connection with its whois review. But even if they did use it, it would not help them with any of their privacy or data protection concerns. Can you tell me how looking up the Whois record of Facebook or Amazon is going to help them in data protection issues related to their services? Do you think they don’t know how to contact those companies? None of the serious problems we have read about lately – from Cambridge Analytica to Equifax data breaches – can be addressed by looking up the domain registration data of a service operator. Even smaller, consumer protection issues related to web sites do not need Whois to identify the owner. There are numerous other ways, and if real law enforcement issues are raised there will be disclosure.


2.       People think that it helps if they are filing a criminal complaint or a civil lawsuit. There is someone out there to blame (or name in legal documents)

No, John, it is not “people” who think that it helps, it is a few large copyright and trademark interests. The registrants those people need Whois to sue are not large businesses or even small businesses, because contact and location information is easily available for commercial corporations. No, it is individual domain name registrants who they want to use Whois to track down. Exploitation of open public whois has been made into an industry by companies like AppDetex, Mark Monitor and Domain Tools and these companies just monetize the data for the sake of brand protection companies. Brand protection and pursuit of trademark infringers is, of course, a perfectly legitimate activity but that must happen within the constraints of due process and privacy law.

Perhaps the weakest part of your argument is that you seem to be assuming that redacting the data from indiscriminate public access means that no one can ever get it. Clearly, this isn’t true. There will be procedures for disclosure of redacted information. It’s very disappointing that At Large-based analysts of this issue don’t seem to understand the basic distinction between public information and information that can be disclosed for legitimate reasons. That distinction is critical to compliance with GDPR and other privacy laws. That distinction is also crucial to protecting the broader interests of individual internet users.


3.       I’ve heard from many people is that they want the WHOIS to be open and public.

John, all I can say here is WTF? There are two screamingly obvious problems with this statement. First, Whois being open and public as it once was is OFF THE TABLE, as it is literally illegal in most of the world. ICANN cannot require that and registrars and registries cannot offer that without being subject to massive fines. So it doesn’t matter what those people want.

Second, I am forced to ask, what “people” are you talking to? It seems that At Large is talking only to brand protection interests and services that monetize the free data. Why don’t you talk to the millions of people and organizations who paid for privacy and proxy services under the old whois? Why don’t you talk to some registrars, or registries who offer transnational service? Or even to ccTLD operators who have been redacting the personal data for most of their history?

So to conclude, if this is the kind of reasoning AL is using to justify its position AL needs to conduct a more open and inclusive debate about its position. I think the legitimacy of At Large as a representative of internet users is at stake. You need to back away from knee-jerk alliance with IPC/BC and re-think what you are doing.

Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology



From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Michael Karanicolas
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 8:44 PM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: RDS/WHOIS 2 Review Team Comments/ALAC Mechanisms

Hi John,

It's good to hear from you on this, and I appreciate your perspective. But - when you say:

"And that’s a great argument except that an insurance salesman in Nebraska or a shopkeeper in Toronto probably doesn’t share that view. End users simply don’t see it that way."

That seems, to me, like an enormous and sweeping statement... and it seems kind of problematic to assert something like that based on a few conversations you've had.

I really don't mean to be glib - I know that assessing the interests and values of the world's Internet users is an incredibly difficult proposition.

But I wonder if you've considered whether ALAC should potentially be more nuanced in the positions that it takes, either in the sense of holding back from acting as a strong voice for conclusions where there's a strong counter-argument in terms of how Internet users' interests would be best served, or staking out positions that reflect the diversity of opinions that exists?

Best,

Michael


On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 8:20 PM Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com<mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:
That is an interesting argument. How does knowing the physical address of Google's headquarters, for instance, empower an individual to take action against Google.com if they feel like their privacy has been violated?

Ayden


‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Wednesday, 21 November 2018 02:18, John Laprise <jlaprise at gmail.com<mailto:jlaprise at gmail.com>> wrote:


On the contrary, it’s about whose privacy we’re protecting. Most people don’t own a website let alone a domain and the domain holders are seen by the public as the ones likely to violate their privacy and therefore making the domain holders information available/public enables end users to hold them accountable.


From: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com<mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 7:10 PM
To: John Laprise <jlaprise at gmail.com<mailto:jlaprise at gmail.com>>
Cc: mkaranicolas at GMAIL.COM<mailto:mkaranicolas at GMAIL.COM>; NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>; avri at apc.org<mailto:avri at apc.org>; julf at JULF.COM<mailto:julf at JULF.COM>; 'Maureen Hilyard' <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>>; 'Jonathan Zuck' <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>>
Subject: Re: RDS/WHOIS 2 Review Team Comments/ALAC Mechanisms



Sorry, I forgot to reply to this point in my previous email-



I am pleased to see that you trust and depend upon polling from Pew as well. A recent study from Pew found that a large majority of Americans are VERY concerned about their privacy, don't know what they can do about it, AND think laws to protect privacy are inadequate. I think it is a real pity that ALAC's positions do not reflect this concern.



http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/27/americans-complicated-feelings-about-social-media-in-an-era-of-privacy-concerns/



Best wishes, Ayden





‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Wednesday, 21 November 2018 02:01, John Laprise <jlaprise at gmail.com<mailto:jlaprise at gmail.com>> wrote:



Hi everyone,



So how does ALAC reach consensus on positions? Largely by taking amongst ourselves. More importantly, how do ALAC members arrive at positions on issues that they believe reflects the sense of their RALO. Speaking for myself I do a lot of listening and reading inside and outside of policy circles. While I don’t conduct surveys, my region is blessed with many reputable and robust pollsters. Pew is good starting point. In addition, professionally I work as a market research manager for a nonprofit that isn’t Internet-centric but relies on the Internet to deliver content. In the course of my day job I hear a lot about the Internet from end users.



If I could offer one general insight from a NARALO point of view to answer Ayden’s question “One wonders why that is their priority.”, one view I’ve heard from many people is that they want the WHOIS to be open and public. The US is a litigious society but one where the government does not (for the most part) pose a visceral threat to life and limb. Many people map the idea of domain name ownership to property ownership. In the US, real estate might be held by a holding company but there are records and deeds. Public availability of such information is seen by many as essential to holding domain holders to account. Please note that I have my own views of this analogy and an awareness of NARALO’s unusual homogeneity.



Granted: there are LOTs of things to nit pick about the comment above but it is a generalization. We try to do our best to represent.



Best regards,



John Laprise

NARALO ALAC Representative





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181122/33ab9211/attachment.htm>