[bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 2-AUG: BC comments on Thick Whois PDP Initial Report

[Andy Abrams]

Thanks to Elisa and Steve for this draft.  Google supports this document as
well as Marie's additional bullet point.

Best,

Andy



On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Ron Andruff <randruff at rnapartners.com>wrote:

> RNA supports Marie’s important additions and the rest of the document as
> is.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thank you,****
>
> ** **
>
> RA****
>
> ** **
>
> *Ron Andruff*
>
> *RNA Partners*
>
> *www.rnapartners.com *
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Marie Pattullo
>
> *Sent:* Monday, July 29, 2013 10:30
> *To:* bc-gnso at icann.org
> *Subject:* FW: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 2-AUG: BC comments on Thick Whois
> PDP Initial Report****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks to Elisa & Steve; AIM fully supports a move towards thick WHOIS.***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> On page 2, can we please add one bullet:****
>
> ** **
>
> Requiring a ‘thick’ WHOIS would: ****
>
> **•              **improve response consistency,****
>
> **•              **improve stability,****
>
> **•              **improve access to WHOIS data, and****
>
> **•              **provide a more level playing field for competition
> between Registries.****
>
> **•              **enhance consumer/user protection****
>
> ** **
>
> Rationale: we’re supposed to be ensuring that the DN system works for the
> benefit of users – not just registrars/registries. Consumers should have
> the right to know to whom they are giving their data, including credit card
> details.****
>
> ** **
>
> Many thanks for considering the above,****
>
> ** **
>
> Marie****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org<owner-bc-gnso at icann.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Laura Covington
> *Sent:* dimanche 28 juillet 2013 18:22
> *To:* Steve DelBianco
> *Cc:* bc-gnso at icann.org list
> *Subject:* Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 2-AUG: BC comments on Thick Whois
> PDP Initial Report****
>
> ** **
>
> Looks good to us.  Thanks, Elisa.
>
> Sent from my iPhone****
>
>
> On Jul 27, 2013, at 9:43 AM, "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>
> wrote:****
>
> As we've discussed before, there's a PDP (Policy Development Process)
> underway to consider requiring thick Whois for *all* gTLD registries —
> including legacy TLDs such as com and net.****
>
> ** **
>
> The Working Group published its Initial Report (here<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/thick-initial-21jun13-en.pdf%20>),
> concluding there are more benefits than disadvantages to requiring thick
> Whois for all gTLD registries. The Working Group recommends that thick
> Whois services should "become a requirement for all gTLD registries, both
> existing and future."****
>
> ** **
>
> Public comment page is here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/thick-whois-initial-21jun13-en.htm>
> .****
>
> ** **
>
> Elisa Cooper prepared the attached draft of BC comments.****
>
> ** **
>
> The reply comment period closes 4-Aug-2013, so please *Reply All* before
> 2-Aug with edits or questions.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> And thanks to Elisa for preparing this draft.****
>
> ** **
>
> --****
>
> Steve DelBianco ****
>
> Vice chair for policy coordination****
>
> Business Constituency****
>
> ** **
>
> <BC Comments - Thick Whois PDP WG Initial Report [Draft v1].doc>****
>
>


-- 
Andy Abrams | Trademark Counsel
*Google* | 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043
(650) 669-8752 <https://www.google.com/voice#phones>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20130802/08e24c23/attachment.html>