| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
US Government Fights User Privacy in DNS - Again
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 8 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Even if this is the case, the the Privacy Act could still require the DoC to publish information about the .us whois "system of records" such as the conditions under which it is operated and the disclosure conditions.
In other words, a treaty/agreement that requires public access is not inconsistent with the obligations of the Privacy Act to publish information concerning the database and to maintain certain operational practices.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re:Treaties
by KarlAuerbach
|
| Starting Score: |
2 |
points |
| Moderation |
|
+1 |
|
| Extra 'Informative' Modifier |
|
0 |
|
| Karma-Bonus Modifier |
|
+1 |
|
| Total Score: |
|
4 |
|
|
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
|
