[At-Large] [WHOIS-WG] Fwd: WHOIS Policy Review Team Final Report
avri at acm.org
Tue May 15 12:21:13 UTC 2012
Actually without SOIs from all ALAC and RALO leaders we have no idea who may our may not have commercial or other interest. Also since a commercial entity can become an ALS, it is difficult to make a sweeping statement that there are no underlying commercial interests.
I fear that perhaps thou doth protest too much. I always worry when I see such an indignant response to a question about hidden motives.
Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:
>On 15 May 2012 00:38, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu>
>> Historically, going back to the interim ALAC, this group had a strong
>> pro-privacy stance.
>Oh, you mean the all-appointed, no-ALS-or-RALO ALAC? That's telling.
>> I noticed over the last 2 or 3 years that the statements evolved in
>> opposite direction, possibly under the influence of some who have a
>> business interest in an open-to-anyone WHOIS.
>Please offer evidence of ANY such business interests within At-Large
>especially ALAC. Such baseless, gossip-level accusations are demeaning
>the debate. Indeed I would suggest the opposite, that it is the influx
>non-insider involvement in ALAC, thanks to the ALS-RALO structure, that
>led to the shift in position. It is my perspective that the most
>proponents for WHOIS accountability within At-Large are amongst its
>Historically, the ALAC cared for all individuals, even those
>> domain names. Now, the latter are told to move on to NCUC.
>To use the same terminology, there is nobody "caring" for the interests
>non-registrant end users except At-Large; registrants have other,
>more-direct channels into ICANN policy development. And it has only
>recently that anyone here has acknowledged the reality that registrants
>end users have different, sometimes competing interests. WHOIS accuracy
>reliability is one of those realms in which the interests diverge
> In fact, look close enough and you'd find some movement in this final
>> report to the ALAC's pronounced view.
>> Indeed. At long last, the need for some privacy system is
>> even going as suggesting to regulate privacy providers.
>Exactly. ALAC has never been anti-privacy. But privacy and anonymity
>not synonymous, and the provision of privacy is not properly delivered
>obfuscating WHOIS information.
>Em: evan at telly dot org
>At-Large mailing list
>At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
More information about the At-Large