[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For WG Review - Redlined Problem Statement

[Greg Shatan]

Registrants clearly have interests in the first set and should not be
removed from that set.

Greg S.

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
wrote:

> Yes, this is a good addition, Rob. I support your suggested edit.
>
> - Ayden
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For WG Review - Redlined Problem Statement
> Local Time: August 23, 2016 4:10 PM
> UTC Time: August 23, 2016 3:10 PM
> From: rob.golding at astutium.com
> To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>
> > Consumers, the domain name industry, governments, intellectual property
> owners, and registrants all have a vested interest in an RDS system which
> contains accurate and complete registration data, and which is secure,
> resilient, accessible, auditable, and performs well.
> > Additionally, some registrants desire anonymity and their requirements
> regarding data collection and data access may be at odds with others
>
> I think we need to expand the "2nd set" (and remove registrants from the
> 1st set)
> Something more like :
> Additionally, Registrants have a right to privacy and a right (locale
> dependant) to control over access to their data, so their requirements may
> be at odds with others.
>
>
> Rob
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160823/b4e95363/attachment.html>