[At-Large] [WHOIS-WG] Fwd: WHOIS Policy Review Team Final Report
carlton.samuels at gmail.com
Wed May 16 17:00:43 UTC 2012
I would still like to know who your gut tells is the Svengali directing
ALAC positions on the WHOIS issue.
For the record, my SOI is and remains public information; no conflicts.
What I find personally irritating is the notion you espouse that I,
myself, could be 'directed' to a position!
It is galling because if this was the case, I would have wasted the
literally hundreds of hours I've spent reading and cross-checking
documents/sources to shape a position!
With respect, you might wish to review this business of taking your gut as
bellewether to a blood libel. Not good.
Carlton A Samuels
*Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:55 AM, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu
> On 15/05/12 17:07, Carlton Samuels wrote:
> Your position condemns ordinary users who are hurt by bad actors to do
> without the basic information to initiate redress of grievance.
> Undoubtedly WHOIS information to a class of better informed interlocutors
> could likely be fruitful. But information discrimination of the kind
> suggested against victims of dissolute behaviours adds insult to injury.
> Count me out.
> A fully open, public WHOIS condemns honest domain name registrants to be
> hurt by bad actors, like spammers. Being harassed on the phone, and see
> personal details exposed for all to see.
> I have no doubt experts in cybercrime would find the useful clues in the
> WHOIS. I am all in favour of giving them access to the information they
> need, as long as they clearly identify themselves, the work they do and be
> transparent who they work for, have a code of conduct, etc. However, I
> consider that exposing the private details of millions of honest individual
> domain name registrants to chase a few thousand criminals, who would fake
> their contact details anyway, is disproportionate from a human rights POV.
> Note also that other registries, mostly ccTLDs, have privacy policies.
> Yet, they do not have more issues with counterfeiting and spam than the
> main gTLDs have. What is disappointing is that ICANN (both the
> corporation and the community) does not want to question the model they use
> and learn from best practices developed elsewhere.
> Lastly, we should really distinguish between data collection and data
> display. The current ICANN WHOIS policy does not. Collecting private
> details is legitimate. Displaying them to everyone is not. I doubt there
> are many countries where one can consult the car registration database or
> obtain the details of an unlisted phone number without showing the right
> credentials to access that data. Why should the domain name database be any
> different ?
> All aside, I am curious as to the identity of the individual allegedly
> of outsize influence "who have a business interest in an open-to-anyone
> This is more a gut feeling based on past posts that the result of an
> investigation. Frankly, I would have absolutely no issue if people made a
> living in fighting spam, counterfeit goods or generally investigate
> criminal activities. As long as this is transparent to the rest of the
> community. Indeed, I think Evan's suggestion to publish SOIs is a good
> starting point. I have not done so, because I am not in a leadership
> position, but I would have no issue to do it, if required. Maybe this
> should be extended to all members of the WGs.
> WHOIS-WG mailing list
> WHOIS-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> WHOIS WG Wiki:
More information about the At-Large