Re: [registrars] Proposed Ballots

["Joyce Lin" <joyce@007names.com>]

I am concerned about this amendment. It may lead us to a slippery slop that
big buys with deep pocket receive special treatment while small name holders
get harassed. The same concerned I have regarding the new WIPO
recommendations.

Joyce
007names

----- Original Message -----
From: "Margie Milam" <Margie.Milam@markmonitor.com>
To: "Elana Broitman" <ebroitman@register.com>; <ross@tucows.com>;
<registrars@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 11:32 AM
Subject: RE: [registrars] Proposed Ballots


> I would like to propose an additional revision to the amendment which
would include a reference to intellectual property interests as follows:
>
> "At the same time, the Registrar Constituency recognizes that there may be
a number of legitimate reasons, including the protection of intellectual
property,  ....
>
> "...the Registrar Constituency proposes that the GNSO Council's Privacy
Task Force review privacy and intellectual property concerns ...
>
> These changes would make it clear that the registrar consituency is
concerned about intellectual property interests and would make it more
likely that the other consituencies would support the registrar position on
this issue.
>
> Regards,
>
> Margie
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elana Broitman [mailto:ebroitman@register.com]
> Sent: Wed 4/9/2003 8:05 AM
> To: ross@tucows.com; registrars@dnso.org
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Proposed Ballots
>
>
>
> Ross - this looks good - I would support this as a friendly amendment.
>
> Mike - can we get this on the ballot please?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ross@tucows.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 9:24 PM
> To: registrars@dnso.org
> Cc: Elana Broitman
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Proposed Ballots
>
>
> > Same here Rob. I had earlier considered attempting to put together an
> > amendment to this motion
>
> Elana, I'd like to put forward the following as a friendly amendmentto
> your earlier motion...
>
> Members of the GNSO Registrar Constituency continue to see abuse of
> public Whois databases by spammers, hijackers and  others intending to
> obtain registrant contact data through  automated or otherwise
> high-volume means for inappropriate purposes.  This raises significant
> privacy, technical and operational concerns for consumers, privacy
> advocates, registrars and registries.  At the same time, the Registrar
> Constituency recognizes that there may be a number of  legitimate
> reasons why key stakeholders may seek to obtain  this same contact
> information through sanctioned means.
>
> In order to ensure an appropriate balance for all interests, the
> Registrar Constituency proposes that the GNSO Council's Privacy Task
> Force review privacy concerns related to the Whois protocol, service and
> contractual data provisioning requirements for ICANN gTLD registrars and
> registries and make recommendations to limit the availability of such
> data only to legitimate interests and uses, protect it from unauthorized
> use and review whether or not the Whois protocol and service itself may
> be better replaced by a more appropriate alternative.
>
> [] I support the statement as a formal position of the Registrar
> Constituency;
> [] I  do not support the statement as a formal position of the Registrar
> Consituency;
> [] Abstain.
>
> PS - are we gonna vote on any of this anytime soon? I'm getting ballot
> withdrawal. :)
>
> -rwr
>
>
>
>