DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[comments-whois] RE: [ga] Intellectual Property and the WHOIS

When meaningful public involvement in the policy development process is
systematically ignored, it is hardly surprising that policies develop that
give a skewed view of public feedback and damage the public interest.

ICANN is in such a position today, even though it is contractually obligated
to weigh the public interest heavily in its decisions, has been criticized
for it's lack of proper consideration to the user community, and has
promised to improve operations. It hasn't happened.

Rather, those with extreme views on intellectual property issues have been
allowed to run away with themselves, to Task Forces as vehicles to promote
self interests at the expense of core issues of public interest. In this
case, the core public interest issue is Privacy, one which the Report does
not even address.

The answer is to send this report back for more work, and this time, convene
a new Task Force made up entirely of those for whom the public interest is
their only interest. And to give that group Terms of Reference that start
and finish with Privacy. Then the work as a whole would have value.

As it is, it should be treated as one side of a two-sided coin, and as such,
not legal currency.

Joanna Lane

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>