[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Purpose in accordance with Registry Agreement section 2.18
Lisa Phifer
lisa at corecom.com
Sat Jun 3 04:15:47 UTC 2017
The same NORC study examined potentially
commercial activity on websites hosted by sampled
domain names. As this is not a straight-forward
classification, I'd encourage you to read the
executive summary of the study itself, found here:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/registrant-identification-summary-23may13-en.pdf
That said, one finding that may be helpful in
answer to your question: "Domain names registered
by natural persons were equally as likely to be
used for some kind of potentially commercial
activity as the overall sample 55.4 ± 4.3
percent, as compared to the entire samples 56.6 percent." (page 4)
-- Lisa Phifer
At 06:01 PM 6/2/2017, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:
>The interesting question is of the 33% natural
>persons how many are engaging in commerce and
>thus not entitled to a privacy shield.
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jun 2, 2017, at 18:44, Deacon, Alex <Alex_Deacon at mpaa.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Stephanie.
> >
> > This seems clear to me. Of the 1600 WHOIS records randomly retrieved
> > 59% (legal persons + p/p registrations)
> appear to not be natural persons.
> > 33% appear to be natural persons.
> > 8% could not be determined.
> >
> > Alex
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on
> behalf of Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
> > Date: Friday, June 2, 2017 at 4:34 PM
> > To: Dotzero <dotzero at gmail.com>
> > Cc: RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> > Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Purpose in
> accordance with Registry Agreement section 2.18
> >
> > Well, I guess I must be confused. Here
> are the results of the NORC study, please tell
> me how I should be reading these. P2, executive summary.
> > Stephanie
> >
> > NORC
> > |
> > Project Summary Report
> > WHOIS Registrant I
> > dentification Study
> > | 2
> > Nevertheless, NORC has produced a coded set of data
> > that is useful for its intended purposean
> > exploratory study of registrant and domain user char
> > acteristics and the types of domain use activities.
> > With respect to answering
> > the issues posed by the GAC:
> > ï§
> > Percentage of registrants that are natural versus legal persons
> > : Based on our analysis of the
> > WHOIS records retrieved from a random sample of
> > 1,600 domains from the top five gTLDs,
> > ï·
> > 39 percent (± 2.4 percent
> > 1
> > ) appear to be registered by legal persons
> > ï·
> > 33 percent (± 2.3 percent) appear to
> > be registered by natural persons
> > ï·
> > 20 percent (± 2.0 percent) were
> registered using a privacy or proxy service.
> > ï·
> > We were unable to classify the remaining 8 pe
> > rcent (± 1.4 percent) using data available
> > from WHOIS.
> >
> >
> > On 2017-06-02 16:15, Dotzero wrote:
> >
> >
> > The overwhelming majority of domains
> registered would be considered for commercial
> purposes. The fact that a small percentage of
> domains are registered by individuals for
> personal use should not be the determining
> factor as to what is appropriate for ICANN
> > to do. In fact, many of what people
> assert are personal domains have advertising on
> them and would therefor be considered by almost
> any jurisdiction to be engaged in a commercial
> activity. This includes many (most?) parked domains.
> >
> >
> > Under these circumstances, having
> disclosure requirement in registry/registrar
> agreements seems very appropriate and
> reasonable. Adding in the fact that "private
> registration" is an option reduces the scope of the issue even further.
> >
> >
> > This is starting to increasingly look like
> a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.
> >
> >
> > Michael Hammer
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Stephanie Perrin
> > <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
> >
> > This clause has not been acceptable in the
> past, even before GDPR. I think it is worth
> pointing out that what is in the ICANN
> agreements has been repeatedly pointed out,
> notably by the Art 29 WG, but certainly
> > by others such as the IWGDPT, as
> violating DP law. These documents I believe
> are all in our repository. So please let us
> not assume that what has been happening is ok,
> even if we sign contract after contract with
> the same offending clauses in them. Consent
> > in most jurisdictions has to be some
> variant of "free, enlightened, and
> informed". Noone can be compelled to consent
> to a practice that is disproportionate or fails
> the necessity test...An ability to withdraw
> consent has to be available. I won't go on and
> > on but this clause obviously does not pass this test.
> >
> > In my opinion, the longer ICANN tries to
> stymie the DPAs and ignore necessary changes in
> privacy policy, the greater the risk they run
> that a viral campaign will be launched among ordinary users, to appeal to the
> > Courts. DPAs try to effect change
> through dialogue. WHen dialogue fails,
> individuals have to take cases to Court. We don't want that.
> > Stephanie
> >
> >
> > On 2017-06-02 08:19, Volker Greimann wrote:
> >
> >
> > I was just reviewing the changes to the
> registry agreement again and I noticed a
> section that has relevance here as well and that had not been discussed here.
> >
> >
> > Apparently the definition of the purpose
> for personal data collection as far as ICANN is
> concerned is the job of the registry operators:
> >
> >
> > 2.18 Personal Data. Registry Operator
> shall (i) notify each ICANN-accredited
> registrar that is a party to the
> Registry-Registrar Agreement for the TLD of the
> purposes for which data about any identified or
> identifiable natural person (âPersonal Dataâ) submitted
> > to Registry Operator by such registrar is
> collected and used under this Agreement or
> otherwise and the intended recipients (or
> categories of recipients) of such Personal
> Data, and (ii) require such registrar to obtain
> the consent of each registrant in the
> > TLD for such collection and use of
> Personal Data. Registry Operator shall take
> reasonable steps to protect Personal Data
> collected from such registrar from loss,
> misuse, unauthorized disclosure, alteration or
> destruction. Registry Operator shall not use or
> > authorize the use of Personal Data in a
> way that is incompatible with the notice provided to registrars.
> >
> >
> > This does have some relevance to our
> current discussion, so I thought I'd recklessly post it here!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> >
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rds-pdp-wg&data=02%7C01%7Calex_deacon%40mpaa.org%7Cd7a8099b4ae441604dba08d4aa0f3a8a%7C17e50b56d5dd439b962acc7ecd9ab7fe%7C0%7C0%7C636320429778775386&sdata=y2j0LULS69MrHIP0UNcIxg4UWGR0h89twrk%2FQNa6pO8%3D&reserved=0>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list