ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    Privacy Tucows tables a pro-privacy proposal
    posted by tbyfield on Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:27PM

    In a 4 April message to miscellaneous ICANN hierophants -- the board, some staff, some Names Council members, and the Registrars constituency list -- Tucows rep Timothy Denton followed up on Tucows' pro-privacy initiative at the March 2001 meeting...



    Attached to Denton's email was "an open letter regarding Registrant privacy" (in PDF form here) arguing that the ICANN Registrars' Accreditation Agreement (RAR) should be amended in two ways. First, registrant information should be private unless the registrant affirmatively chooses to make his/her info available for "bulk access," i.e., third-party mass marketing; and second, the RAR's current limitations on email marketing should be extended to cover all forms of mass solicitation.

    Sadly, though perhaps sagely, Denton makes it clear that these changes would "not affect the right of" -- note the order here -- "IP holders and law enforcement to ascertain the owner, and reach the administrative and technical contacts." This isn't terribly surprising, in light of, say, a remark allegedly made by Michael Palage, co-chair of Working Group B ("famous trademarks"), in a 6 January 2000 roundtable hosted by the US Small Business Administration: "The trademark lobby must be placated because of its potential ability and inclination to bankrupt new registrars and wreck havoc on their registrant databases." But it's frustrating nevertheless: the transformation of registration data from a practical networking necessity into into a surveillance tool for "IP" zealots, consequences be damned en masse, is in many ways the quintessence of what ICANN is all about.

    Be that as it may, the Tucows proposal is an excellent start. Unfortunately, it hasn't elicited any responses on the Registrars mailing list (archives here).

    How ICANN will respond to the Tucows initiative is anyone's guess, as they say. Among his suggested requirements for a consensus policy, Denton lists "appropriate supporting documents recording the debate and outreach efforts within and without the DNSO" -- exactly the kind of stuff that ICANN specializes in sidestepping and circumlocuting.

    Given ICANN VP Louis Touton's comical lack of candor with regard to the Whois Committee (documented here and here), it seems unlikely that some pesky bottom-up policy will be met with open arms. How much less likely any changes to the RAR that might in some way impinge on the power of the MPAA and the RIAA -- two of the three non-registrar/registry members of the Whois Committee -- to spam out nastygrams to hundreds or even thousands (or even hundreds of thousands :) of John Does.

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
  • ICANN
  • email
  • here
  • Registrars' Accreditation Agreement
  • Working Group B
  • here
  • Whois Committee
  • here
  • here
  • More on Privacy
  • Also by tbyfield
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Tucows tables a pro-privacy proposal | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 1 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: Tucows tables a pro-privacy proposal
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Thursday April 12 2001, @02:23AM (#517)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    I agree that the Tucows proposal is a better, albeit far from best, policy, compared to what we have. But I think we'd all be better off if ICANN were to define the minimum amount of whois information necessary for the techncial functioning of the internet -- which I take to be a techncial contact and no more. ICANN should then require that minimum and no more. Everything else is social policy and should be decided by national authorities or their delegates (e.g. the EU in the case of european registries).
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com