[bc-gnso] RE: For BC review & comment: draft response to Whois Review Team

Marilyn Cade marilynscade at hotmail.com
Mon Apr 11 06:15:42 UTC 2011

My suggestion is that the BC position should strongly support the broader definition. All Web and Internet statistics use the concept of individuals who use the Internet -- e.g. who have access to the Internet.  And, I agree with Lynn [and others] that the AoC intended to refer to that broader characterization.  
Does the draft need to make all that clearer in its language? 

From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com
To: sdelbianco at netchoice.org
CC: jocallaghan at newscorp.com; berrycobb at infinityportals.com; sarah.b.deutsch at verizon.com; Elisa.Cooper at markmonitor.com; bc-GNSO at icann.org
Subject: [bc-gnso] RE: For BC review & comment: draft response to Whois Review Team
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 17:59:10 -0700

Thanks Steve for this draft and the work of the BC to provide productive comments. As an member of the Whois Review Team, I would personally appreciate support from the BC for the broader definition of "consumer" as a global Internet user rather than the narrow definition that would limit the concept of consumers to registrants and ICANN stakeholders.  I maintain that the broader definition is consistent with language in other sections of the AOC that refer to "public interest" and "Internet users" as well as the policy requirement for public availability of Whois data.
Also, I believe members of the BC have first hand experience with the UDRP process and a good understanding of the dependency on Whois data for dispute resolution.  The BC perspective on this specific need for accurate and reliable Whois data would be helpful in progressing our work.Lynn

  -------- Original Message --------
 Subject: For BC review & comment: draft response to Whois Review Team
 From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>
 Date: Thu, April 07, 2011 2:46 pm
 To: "bc-GNSO at icann.org" <bc-GNSO at icann.org>
 Cc: Janet O'Callaghan <jocallaghan at newscorp.com>, Lynn Goodendorf
 <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>, Berry Cobb
 <berrycobb at infinityportals.com>, Sarah Deutsch
 <sarah.b.deutsch at verizon.com>;, Elisa Cooper
 <Elisa.Cooper at markmonitor.com>;
 ICANN is gathering responses to questions posed by the Whois review team. 
Attached is a discussion draft for BC response prepared by Elisa Cooper.  (Steve DelBianco added a bit about Whois studies)   
On our last member call, several others also volunteered to add to this response, so we're looking forward to your additions:Sara DeutschBerry CobbLynn GoodendorfJanet O'Callaghan
ICANN's Comment period closes 17-Apr.    Today (7-Apr) begins an 8-day review period for this discussion draft. We can submit this response later if members feel they need the entire 14-day review and discussion period. 
Please review and post your suggestions/edits as soon as possible.   If there are no disagreements noted by 17-Apr, this response will be adopted without a voting period, and posted to ICANN.
For topic background, see http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#whois-rt 
Thanks again to Elisa Cooper for serving as BC Rapporteur on this.  

Regards,Steve DelBiancoVice chair for policy coordination
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20110411/6aaeef59/attachment.html>

More information about the Bc-gnso mailing list