[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Meetings/Conversations with Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners

[Rob Golding]

On 2017-09-26 17:38, allison nixon wrote:
> It's not irrelevent, because people here keep going on and on about
> how it's going to become illegal to publish any ownership info
> relating to domains, but many other sites on the internet clearly do
> not follow these extraordinarily strict guidelines people want to set
> for whois

Facebook aren't publishing the "account owners' information".
They may be publishing what (if anything) the user chooses to tell 
facebook to publish - they're the same thing at all.

You dont expect an Airline to publish a passenger list along with home 
address and date/time of purchase on their website, just because someone 
bought a plane ticket, so why would you expect the same for people who 
bought a domain name ?

re the Co-House "leak" qestion ...
> So you have a physical address, a list of people's names, their 
> physical
> addresses, and their entire filing history. Is this "leaked" data as 
> well?

No.

If you want to have a legally registered company in the UK, and the 
benefits/protections that come from that legal entity, you have to 
comply with the Companies Act, which requires that the _registered 
office_ (where legal docs are kept) and names of those running it are 
"public" information

They're not home-addresses of those people (just service addresses where 
letters may be sent to - often virtual rather than physical). You can 
run a business without being a registered company.

So it's not "private data being leaked" it's been designated "public 
data".

And if you want the additional benefit of Limited Liability in the event 
of company collapse that comes at the cost of your dateOfBirth becoming 
public, so that people can do additional checks on you (somewhat 
redundant now as was because traditional credit checks needed Full Name 
and DOB back-in-the-day)

An equivalent exists in most locales, Dellaware's LLCs having the people 
behind them and the local service address being public for example


On 2017-09-26 16:35, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:
> Then facebook, gmail, and quite frankly, THE ENTIRE INTERNET cannot
> exist if this were true.

Facebook dont publish the personal data of their users.
Gmail dont publish the personal data of their users.
And although I don't personally know him Frank Ly probably doesn't 
publish the personal data of his users either.

These offerings _may_ provide (and encourage) the user with a way of 
them _optionally_ providing or publishing things to a greater or lesser 
extent, but it's not mandatory, it's not (probably) illegal, publishing 
is not a requirement of having the service and so on, all of which 
describe WHOIS

> But it's not true. It'd a red herring.

Yes, bringing up FB/Gmail/T.E.I. etc is a complete red herring. Again.

Rob