[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Carlton's closing chat question
James M. Bladel
jbladel at godaddy.com
Mon Jan 20 16:23:16 UTC 2014
Criminal individuals, or criminal commercial organizations?
And is it your contention that criminals provide valid
identification/contact details to the P/P service?
Thanks‹
J.
On 1/20/14, 10:20 , "Bob Bruen" <bruen at coldrain.net> wrote:
>
>
>Hi Tim,
>
>The harm is protecting the identities of criminnals. And I consider
>undermining whois a harm, as well
>
> --bob
>
>
>On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, Tim Ruiz wrote:
>
>> What are the problems commercial entities that use p/p have caused?
>>
>>> On Jan 20, 2014, at 8:11 AM, "Bob Bruen" <bruen at coldrain.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Volker,
>>>
>>> I was merely responding to Stephanie's comments about the
>>>difficulties, not advocating a position.
>>>
>>> However, as you are aware, I do advocate barring commercial entities
>>>from using p/p, because the use has already caused harm and we should
>>>fix that. The providers created the problem in the first place, so
>>>allowing them to continue to control it simply continues the problem.
>>>
>>> The discussion of all this is the point of this group (and other
>>>groups).
>>>
>>> --bob
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, Volker Greimann wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I agree that it would be possible to bar commercial entities from
>>>>using p/p services, however I am not sure it is the
>>>> sensible thing to do. Certainly, there is abuse, but by creating a
>>>>blanket prohibition, i fear more damage will be done to
>>>> legitimate interests than good is done to illegitimate ones.
>>>> In the end it should be up to the provider which categories of
>>>>clients it accepts.
>>>> Volker
>>>> Am 20.01.2014 02:08, schrieb Bob Bruen:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Stephanie,
>>>>
>>>> It is entirely possible to decide to bar commercial entities,
>>>>create a definition of "comercial entities" and
>>>> then deal with those which appear to problematical.
>>>>
>>>> The fraudsters probably will not be a set up as a legitimate
>>>>bussiness, but their sites can be identified as
>>>> spam, malware, etc types and thus taking money, therefore a
>>>>business. I am sure there are other methods to deal
>>>> with problem domain names.
>>>>
>>>> In general, exceptions or problems should not derail a process.
>>>>
>>>> --bob
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 19 Jan 2014, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I dont want to keep beating a dead horse here....but if
>>>>there is a resounding
>>>> response of "yes indeed, bar commercial entities from
>>>>using P/P services", then
>>>> how are you going to propose that p/p proxy service
>>>>providers determine who is a
>>>> commercial entity, particularly in jurisdictions which
>>>>have declined to regulate
>>>> the provision of goods and services over the Internet? I
>>>>don't like asking
>>>> questions that walk us into corners we cannot get out of.
>>>>Do the fraudsters we
>>>> are worried about actually apply for business numbers and
>>>>articles of
>>>> incorporation in the jurisdictions in which they operate?
>>>>I operate in a
>>>> jurisdiction where this distinction is often extremely
>>>>difficult to make. THe
>>>> determination would depend on the precise use being made
>>>>of the domain
>>>> name....which gets ICANN squarely into content analysis,
>>>>and which can hardly be
>>>> done for new registrations, even if t were within ICANN's
>>>>remit. I am honestly
>>>> not trying to be difficult, but I just have not heard a
>>>>good answer to this
>>>> problem.
>>>> Stephanie Perrin
>>>> On 2014-01-19, at 4:38 PM, Holly Raiche wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Jin and all
>>>> I agree with Jim here (and Don earlier). The important
>>>>task here is
>>>> agreeing on the questions to be asked of the SO/ACs. So
>>>>we need to get
>>>> back to framing the questions - not answering them,
>>>>however tempting that
>>>> may be.
>>>>
>>>> So the question of whether 'commercial entities' should be
>>>>barred is still
>>>> a useful question to ask. The next question would be
>>>>whether there are
>>>> possible distinctions that should be drawn between an
>>>>entity that can use
>>>> the service and one that can't and, if so, where is the
>>>>line drawn. I agree
>>>> with the discussion on how difficult that will be because
>>>>many entities
>>>> that have corporate status also have reasonable grounds
>>>>for wanting the
>>>> protection of such a service (human rights organisations
>>>>or women's refuges
>>>> come to mind). But that is the sort of response we are
>>>>seeking from
>>>> others outside of this group - so let's not prejudge
>>>>answers. Let's only
>>>> frame the questions that will help us come to some
>>>>sensible answers.
>>>> Otherwise, we'll never get to the next steps.
>>>>
>>>> And my apologies for the next meeting. I have a long day
>>>>ahead on
>>>> Wednesday (Sydney time) and taking calls at 2.00am won't
>>>>help. So Ill read
>>>> the transcript and be back in a fortnight (2 weeks for
>>>>those who do not use
>>>> the term)
>>>>
>>>> Holly
>>>>
>>>> On 16/01/2014, at 5:39 AM, Jim Bikoff wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Don and all,
>>>>
>>>> As we suggested earlier, and discussed in the last Group
>>>> teleconference, it might be helpful, as a next step, if we
>>>>reached a
>>>> consensus on the groups of questions before sending them
>>>>out to
>>>> SO/ACs and SG/Cs.
>>>>
>>>> This would involve two steps: First, agreeing on the name
>>>>of each
>>>> group; and second, streamlining the questions in each
>>>>group.
>>>>
>>>> In the first step, we could consider alternative headings
>>>>(perhaps
>>>> REGISTRATION instead of MAINTENANCE).
>>>>
>>>> And in the second step, we could remove duplicative or
>>>>vague
>>>> questions.
>>>>
>>>> This crystallization would make the questions more
>>>>approachable, and
>>>> encourage better responses.
>>>>
>>>> I hope these ideas are helpful.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> James L. Bikoff
>>>> Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP
>>>> 1101 30th Street, NW
>>>> Suite 120
>>>> Washington, DC 20007
>>>> Tel: 202-944-3303
>>>> Fax: 202-944-3306
>>>> jbikoff at sgbdc.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal at pir.org>
>>>> Date: January 14, 2014 11:09:23 AM EST
>>>> To: PPSAI <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>>> Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Carlton's closing chat
>>>>question
>>>> Carlton posted an issue that shouldn¹t wait a week:
>>>>
>>>> ³John came up with 4 groups. Do we have a notion that
>>>>others
>>>> might be extracted? And where do we include/modify
>>>>questions
>>>> to address Stephanie's issue?"
>>>>
>>>> Jim had four groups and an umbrella Main category, which
>>>>may be
>>>> instructive in itself in guiding how we proceed
>>>> organizationally. Regardless, the consensus of commenters
>>>>has
>>>> been that his document is a significant improvement over
>>>>where
>>>> we were before, and I suggest that we use it as a baseline.
>>>> However, we still have work to do on it. Feel free to
>>>>suggest
>>>> modifications.
>>>>
>>>> Don
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>>
>>>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Robert Bruen
>>> Cold Rain Labs
>>> http://coldrain.net/bruen
>>> +1.802.579.6288
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>>
>
>--
>Dr. Robert Bruen
>Cold Rain Labs
>http://coldrain.net/bruen
>+1.802.579.6288
More information about the Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
mailing list