Re: [ga] WHOIS policy primer

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Thomas,

For a long time we have all known what the policies are.  We have also known 
that many detest these policies and are looking for aggressive changes rather 
than aggressive enforcement.  Why is the task force of the view that 
"enforcing the existing contractual provisions is the essential first step"?

I, for one, don't want these policies enforced.  I want them changed.  I can 
contact my telephone services provider and request (for a slight fee) an 
unlisted number.  Neither my name, nor my postal address, nor my fax number, 
nor my email address will be published.  This represents no particular burden 
for the law enforcement community and I am able to have the measure of 
privacy that I deem important.  Why then should all my contact details have 
to be exposed in the WHOIS?  

Is the task force arguing that the rights of the intellectual property 
community trump my own privacy rights?  How did you arrive at the 
recommendation regarding enforcing existing contractual provisions?  I see 
that you and Steve Metalitz, president of the Intellectual Property 
Constituency, prepared the section that I find so objectionable:  
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-whois/Arc00/msg00431.html  

How much discussion was there by the group on these recommendations, or were 
they all rushed through to meet your publication deadline?  I haven't found 
any discussion on this topic in this archives, and I don't take kindly to 
having the IPC position railroaded through the process.
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html