[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Discriminatory rds Data Privacy Standards

Sun Apr 1 02:16:23 UTC 2018

Hello

Thought of something that both extends and retracts the question:

> "Could we do away with this notion of (Registrant)data privacy where it
> concerns an online entity that carries out commercial monetary transactions
> online? That would require us to discriminate between private persons and
> e-commerce entities."

If we discriminate between private persons and e-commerce entities, we also
need to discriminate WITHIN the "private persons" class. We may require a
sub-class "false private persons and robots", who/that do not have a
website/mail server,  or have a website/mailserver that serves as part of a
false propagation/malicious network.

So, the following part of the question is also rephrased:

"Private persons ...   need privacy"

Private real persons ... need privacy.

Sivasubramanian M

Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>
twitter.com/shivaindia

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:57 PM, David Cake <dave at davecake.net> wrote:

> This debate has been had before thoroughly.
>
> On 12 Mar 2018, at 8:05 am, Paul Keating <Paul at law.es> wrote:
>
> Volker,
>
> You say:
>
> "These details belong on the websites, as is provided in the laws in
> Europe and other jurisdictions. There is no need to duplicate this in
> whois."
>
>
>
> Why not?  If the local law requires publication of owner data on the
> website what possible objection can one have to also placing it in a
> centralized database. ?
>
>
> The issue is that essentially you are asking for them to know the future
> uses to which they will put their domain at registration, or you are
> putting in place a rule without any practical enforcement mechanism.
>
>
>
> You ask for a simple methodology.  Easy.  Make the registrant
> self –declare.  They must state affirmatively that they use the domain name
> for personal purposes and not for commercial purposes.  They must do this
> each year just as they do now with accuracy inquiries.
>
>
> And again, this is trying to impose a global rule where there is no
> consistent global law.
>
>
> In addition, there are other means available able as well such as:
>
> VAT Number appearing in the payment stream – signifies commercial use.
> Corporate indicator in the name (e.g. SL, SA, GmbH, etc)  on the
> payor – signifies commercial use.
>
>
>  Collection of ad hoc rules of thumb is not the same as a consistent
> policy.
>
> David
>
>
>
> If you have objections to using the above asa means of accomplishing the
> result please let me know.
>
> Paul
>
> From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of "
> benny at nordreg.se" <benny at nordreg.se>
> Date: Monday, March 12, 2018 at 8:11 AM
> To: Greg Aaron <gca at icginc.com>
> Cc: "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Discriminatory rds Data Privacy Standards
>
> And there are examples where they have had to back of after complaints so
> it’s not a black and white thing.
>
> Blame autocorrect for any strange answers
>
> On 11 Mar 2018, at 20:33, Greg Aaron <gca at icginc.com> wrote:
>
> Nominet (U.K.) figured out how to discriminate between commercial and
> noncommercial.  For years, .U.K. policy has been that if a domain is used
> for commercial purposes the registrant does not have the right to opt-out
> of having contact data published in WHOIS.  Seems to have worked pretty
> well.
>
>
>
> https://registrars.nominet.uk/namespace/uk/registration-and-
> domain-management/query-tools/whois/opt-out
>
>
>
> Just saying there’s a realistic, real-world implementation of that kind of
> policy.
>
>
>
> --Greg
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> *On Behalf Of
> *Stephanie Perrin
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 11, 2018 3:24 PM
> *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Discriminatory rds Data Privacy Standards
>
>
>
> +1
>
> Stephanie
>
> On 2018-03-11 15:08, Steve Crocker wrote:
>
> Domain names and web sites are not the same.  I think you're suggesting
> that ICANN would need to know which domain names have web sites associated
> with them and then which of those accept payments in some form.  This is
> digging pretty deeply into content, which is precisely what ICANN does not
> and must not do.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 3:06 PM, sivasubramanian muthusamy <
> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2018 1:01 PM, "John Bambenek" <jcb at bambenekconsulting.com>
> wrote:
>
> Simple. You ask them. “Is this domain owned by an individual for
> non-commercial purposes?”
>
>
>
> Another way is make a distinction is to separate all websites that have a
> payment gateway / that accept payments in some form.
>
>
>
>
>
> If we find domains engaged in commerce registered as personal and
> non-commercial, then we send a complaint. Sure, we gotta define commercial
> but surely that is not hard. We use whatever taxing authority for the
> jurisdiction says.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> John Bambenek
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2018, at 10:24, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
> wrote:
>
> Please provide a workable, reasonable method of identifying the domain
> names used in commercial manner amongst the existing hundreds of million
> registered domains. Please also identify how this determination can be
> updated automatically once the use of a domain name changes.
>
>
>
> The fact is that commercial use is content. ICANN does not deal with
> content except for very small and specific areas. ICANN and registrars have
> no relationship with the content that is published under a domain name. We
> certainly have no control over specific uses.
>
>
>
> These details belong on the websites, as is provided in the laws in Europe
> and other jurisdictions. There is no need to duplicate this in whois.
>
>
>
> Volker
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9. Mar 2018, at 07:49, sivasubramanian muthusamy <6.internet at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Private persons (including private persons in a public career or a career
> of public exposure) need privacy. Why is this notion extended to protect
> online commercial entities of varying ethical standards? Does
> Yourairlinereservations.onlinecommerce have a right to privacy of its
> Registrant data?
>
>
>
> Their customers don't look for contact information from RDS, but in the
> entity's commercial web site, but the information is not there. Many online
> entities operate from behind layers of veil that separate them from
> customers and enable them to carry on their commercial activity with
> minimal or non-existent accountability.
>
>
>
> Yourairlinereservations.onlinecommerce sells millions of air tickets but
> does not seem to have a building somewhere, and/or does not have an
> employee with a name. Yourairlinereservations.onlinecommerce takes your
> money, takes your information without disclosing any of its own, and does
> not have a phone number or answer email messages (operates through call
> centers, answers email messages by templates) when you are stranded
> Midway with a ticket that doesn't work. Yourcasino takes your credit card
> number, yourpharmacy takes your money and medical data, yourholiday owns
> your passport, and all these entities don't have an email address, phone
> number or a building with a person.
>
>
>
> Could we do away with this notion of (Registrant)data privacy where it
> concerns an online entity that carries out commercial monetary transactions
> online? That would require us to discriminate between private persons and
> e-commerce entities, which would be a complex process - agreed.
> Nevertheless, could we think about this?
>
>
>
> Sivasubramanian M
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
>
> --
> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - Rechtsabteilung -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=Im+Oberen+Werk+1+66386+St.+Ingbert&entry=gmail&source=g>
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=Im+Oberen+Werk+1+66386+St.+Ingbert&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 <+49%206894%209396901>
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 <+49%206894%209396851>
> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen
> Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder
> Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese
> Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per
> E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
> us.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - legal department -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=Im+Oberen+Werk+1+66386+St.+Ingbert&entry=gmail&source=g>
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=Im+Oberen+Werk+1+66386+St.+Ingbert&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 <+49%206894%209396901>
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 <+49%206894%209396851>
> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay
> updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it
> is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of
> this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail.
> If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly
> notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________ 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180401/7a6cadc5/attachment-0001.html>