[NA-Discuss] WHOIS study group...NA RALO weigh in?

[Brendler, Beau]

The scary thing, though, is if the policies sunset, maybe the risk is
losing WHOIS data or an analogue to it, altogether? Or do you think if a
public outcry were to ensue, that would encourage re-addressing the
issue via a different protocol, such as the one the SSAC is looking at? 

-----Original Message-----
From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Wendy
Seltzer
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 3:33 PM
Cc: NA Discuss
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] WHOIS study group...NA RALO weigh in?

My personal viewpoint, after seven years of WHOIS task forces and
working groups, is that more studies will not be useful in policy
development, but rather are proposed by several constituencies to
justify further delay with the status quo.

I see WHOIS as a political problem at this point, not a problem of lack
of facts. GNSO constituencies have been wedded to positions based on
their own interests, and they're unlikely to change those positions even
with new studies.  So studies won't change anything in policy
development.  Without assurance that constituencies will change their
policy recommendations if shown new facts, I don't see that
registrant-fee-funded studies serve any ICANN purpose.

For that reason, I have recommended against ICANN funding any new WHOIS
studies.  I'd rather see pressure to reach consensus based on a
sunsetting of policies that no longer command consensus.

--Wendy


Ross Rader wrote:
> The problem with more study on this issue is that it is only a 
> delaying tactic intended to preserve the status quo. The issue has 
> been studied to death. The proposed studies will not be well bounded, 
> nor geared towards action. They will be intentionally broad and the 
> analysis, if any is done, will be purposely weak and obtuse.
> 
> I have no doubt that there will be many people that sign onto the 
> notion of further studies with the best of intentions, but I strongly 
> doubt that the results will point us in any different direction than 
> what we've already discussed and described over the past ten years. 
> Worse still, those that seek to abuse the privacy rights of 
> individuals for their own gain will enjoy another few years free pass 
> to this open database as we study the nooks and crannies of this issue
even further.
> 
> /ross
> 
> Brendler, Beau wrote:
>> Danny Younger, Wendy Seltzer and I are in a WHOIS study group with a 
>> really tight time frame, like three weeks, before it has to report 
>> back to the GNSO council on whether further study of WHOIS is needed,

>> along with other issues.
>>
>> I think opinions differ among the three of us in the group, which has

>> about a dozen members. Opinions aside, I wanted to see if the NA RALO

>> would like to convey either as a group or as individuals their 
>> opinions on the issues presented to the WHOIS working group.
>>

------
NA-Discuss mailing list
NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists
.icann.org
Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/
------

***
Scanned