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

[Chuck]

Kris,

Which points are you saying are true and factual?  Allison's or John's?

Chuck



-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kris Seeburn
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 1:53 AM
To: Rob Golding <rob.golding at astutium.com>
Cc: RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Meetings/Conversations with Data
Protection and Privacy Commissioners

These points are exactly true and factual

Kris

> On 27 Sep 2017, at 11:50, Rob Golding <rob.golding at astutium.com> wrote:
> 
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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