[PC-NCSG] [NCSG-Discuss] Thick Whois WG Comments - with some proposed edits

Mon Jan 14 23:24:52 EET 2013

Hi and thanks to all involved. As a member of the NCSG PC I'm happy to
have us endorse this as an NCSG statement.  

Cheers 
Mary

Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network
(SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584  

>>> 

From:  
Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> 

To: 
"NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>" <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 

CC: 
Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at EGYPTIG.ORG> 

Date:  
1/14/2013 2:00 PM 

Subject:  
Re: [PC-NCSG] [NCSG-Discuss] Thick Whois WG Comments - with some
proposed edits 

Thanks very much, Wendy.  Given the deadline, I'd suggest any comments
or suggested edits be made to this NCSG-PC list by the end of business
today so the stmt can be posted in time. 

Thanks again, 

Robin 

On Jan 14, 2013, at 10:56 AM, Wendy Seltzer wrote: 

On 01/14/2013 01:33 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). 

I support this statement.  Thanks Amr, Kathy, and Roy for your work. 

--Wendy 

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:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf 

Of Kathy Kleiman 

Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 10:05 PM 

To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU 

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: robin at ipjustice.org 

_______________________________________________ 

PC-NCSG mailing list 

PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 

http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg 

--  

Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613 

Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) 

Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University 

Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project 

http://wendy.seltzer.org/ 

https://www.chillingeffects.org/ 

https://www.torproject.org/ 

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ 

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: robin at ipjustice.org 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130114/9a1d574f/attachment-0001.html>