[At-Large] I: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- Notice of Preliminary Determination To Grant Registrar Data Retention Waiver Request for Ascio Technologies, Inc. Danmark - filial af Ascio Technologies, Inc. USA

Vanda Scartezini vanda at uol.com.br
Tue Dec 22 14:50:11 UTC 2015

Olivier, all

 This is really a relevant issue to discuss. In regions like south america where number of registrars is very low ( 17 in all regions ) users depend upon other region registrars, making whole situation worse.
Vanda Scartezini
Polo Consultores Associados
Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004
01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253
Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 
Sorry for any typos. 

On 12/17/15, 5:28 PM, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of ocl at gih.com> wrote:

>Dear John,
>you'll find that the view of the majority of ALAC members will reflect
>the views from the majority of the ALSes and they are pretty much
>aligned with the points you have made in your email.
>This, in fact, is one of the major differences in points of view that
>the ALAC has had with some people in the GNSO's non commercial
>stakeholder group. The ALAC is on record in several statements that for
>domains that are used by commercial organisations, especially when it
>comes to e-commerce, accurate WHOIS records are mandatory. The ALAC's
>meetings with the ICANN Compliance department have often given rise to
>complaints that ICANN Compliance was not doing enough.
>The suggestion which you make, that "when they grant a waiver, it should
>automatically apply to other registrars or registries in the same
>jurisdiction." is something which is worth considering and I wonder if
>this could be a suggestion made by the ALAC, should it wish to pursue
>this topic.
>Kindest regards,
>(my own views)
>On 17/12/2015 17:44, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> years to focus on what it is supposed to be doing. Yet it is still
>>> fixated on imposing terms that are neither legally required in US and in
>>> cases even illegal elsewhere.
>> People with no experience with large networks, which includes pretty
>> much everyone on the ALAC, often seem to believe that collecting less
>> information about domain registrants always improves the privacy of
>> Internet users.  The reality is much more subtle.
>> The vast majority of users have never registered a domain and never
>> will, so WHOIS doesn't affect them, while the vast majority of domains
>> are registered for commercial purposes, and a dismaying number for
>> criminal purposes.  A large registrar often turns off 10,000 domains a
>> day for malware, phishing, and other malevolent behavior.
>> The WHOIS information that most of the waivers concern is very useful
>> for identifying and dealing with criminals.  That is so even though a
>> lot of it is faked, since the crooks tend to have patterns when they
>> fake stuff. I'm not guessing about this, I talk to people every day at
>> network operators who are protecting their users and law enforcement
>> who are protecting their citizens.
>> Registrars should certainly comply with their national laws, and I
>> agree that some of ICANN's rules are silly, e.g., when they grant a
>> waiver, it should automatically apply to other registrars or
>> registries in the same jurisdiction.  But when you make it harder to
>> tell who's behind a domain, you're also making it easier for criminals
>> to siphon the money out of your grandmother's bank account.  That may
>> be a reasonable tradeoff, but it's a tradeoff and one that deserves
>> better than the kneejerk reeactions we always see here.
>> R's,
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.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 mailing list