[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Additional possible requirements from the Cross-Community session on RDS

[Lisa Phifer]

Dear all,

 

Many thanks to all who participated in Monday's Cross-Community session on
RDS. The full transcript of the session will be posted on the meeting page
(http://sched.co/7NCc) when available. In the meantime, below are rough
notes capturing additional possible requirements suggested by attendees. 

 

These and other additions suggested through Outreach #2 will be recorded in
the SO/AC/SG/C section of this WG's wiki (
<https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw> https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw)
and addressed during our Tuesday F2F WG meeting. Thanks again to WG members
serving as liaisons for working to relay further inputs from other groups.

 

Best,

Lisa

 

Possible Requirements suggested by attendees:

 

.                  Uniform presentation of data across all registrars or
registries

.                  Access to LEAs

.                  Ability to consult the history of a registration

.                  Consider whether a domain registration must require
verification that there is a real person behind the domain name registration

.                  In the spirit of many data protection laws around the
world, users should know for what purposes their data is given and to whom

.                  When using a domain name from a person perspective, I
wish my data would not be available to marketing purposes

.                  When I buy something on the web, I would like to be able
to access the registration data for the web page I am using to know it is
the real company

.                  There are a lot of third parties (not just LEAs) who have
legitimate reasons for access to avoid their rights being infringed upon

.                  A key issue is translation or transliteration of
registration data - including provision of contact data and address in local
languages

.                  Related to TM Clearinghouse notices, when notices are
received, analysis that is performed includes going to see who is the
registrant - this often eliminates the need for further action (~60-70%)

.                  For any registered domain, there should be a valid admin
and technical contact and this information should be public, with "as of"
date (as minimum)

.                  Instead of adding to list, we should subtract things in
the spirit of minimization - for example, removing the address from RDS to
reduce risk to individual registrants such as journalists, bloggers, and
many civil society organizations

.                  Having fewer requirements might be helpful. One way to do
that is to not include possible requirements where there may be a better
alternative to achieve the result in a better way

.                  Regarding new plan for transatlantic data protection
(i.e., Privacy Shield) to replace the annulled Safe Harbor mechanism - WG
should recognize this work is going on and keep track of its progress as it
applied to possible requirements for data protection

.                  In existing WHOIS there wasn't a clear interface to
access registration data - it is a requirement to have a clear interface
that makes access easier (i.e., restful API)

.                  There should be a fast real-time way to see whether a
domain name has been registered through a proxy service provider or has
privacy protection. This could ease up concerns about domains having
information omitted

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160628/695c5be4/attachment.html>