RE: [wg-c] Restatement of wg-c discussion

[Mikki Barry <ooblick@netpolicy.com>]

>Mallesons Stephen Jaques
>Confidential communication


How can something posted to a working group mailing list be confidential?

>
>Discussion of many of the items said to be "under discussion" in Mark
>Measday's summary appears to be very thin.
>
>  >What information should be made public by the registry(ies) and how?  A:
>under discussion
>
>The April 1999 WIPO Report, The Management of Internet Names and Addresses,
>(which involved a far more extensive consultation process than this working
>group can claim) made important recommendations on this point at paragraphs
>66, 73, 81, 86 and 90.  It can be found at <
>http://ecommerce.wipo.int/domains/process/eng/processhome.html
><http://ecommerce.wipo.int/domains/process/eng/processhome.html> >


We've been over this before.  The WIPO process ignored dissenting 
opinions, including those opinions of their own "panel of experts." 
The relevant Internet community was NOT consulted, was NOT informed, 
and was NOT allowed to comment.

>
>At the risk of incurring massive personal abuse from those who believe they
>should be given licences to print money without any corresponding
>obligations, these recommendations would seem to be the minimum
>requirements.


One more time, privacy interests need to be protected from oppressive 
governments, from would-be stalkers, from those who wish to persecute 
others because of their beliefs, and from reverse hijackers who want 
licenses to steal domain names from others.

>
>Warwick A Rothnie
>Partner
>Mallesons Stephen Jaques Melbourne
>Direct line (61 3) 9643 4254
>Fax (61 3) 9643 5999
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Obligations of the registry(ies). A: under discussion
>
>(please note this does not represent my personal opinions)
>
>
>MM