RE: [ga] Privacy Brainstorming

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

> of the GAC to assist in resolving some of these complex 
> issues involving the accuracy and access of Whois information.

This isn't about accuracy and access, but privacy. Lets not lose sight
of that - or the reason why we need to consult with the GAC in the first
place - reaching out to individual agencies is neither practical, nor
within our mandate.

> 
> Although you talk about privacy being a universal issue, you 
> miss the fact that national laws have very different 
> approaches toward protecting it, please refer to the 

I do? I thought I was pretty clear in stating that we needed a mechanism
to respect local policy at an international level - not a mechanism to
rationalize local policy on a registrar by registrar or registry by
registry or worse, [insert infinite number of combinations here] basis.

> test, and the ability to demonstrate that the new 
> private-public sector framework can work.

I'm not sure that there is one. I have heard your colleagues at the FTC
use this phrase more than once, but I don't really feel that we are part
of a partnership.


                       -rwr




"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright

Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/

--
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