<div><div dir="auto">Let's remember we're all part of an ecosystem, with valuable roles to play (even the lawyers and policy people). We should make genuine efforts to understand each other's experiences, knowledge and perspectives. This jousting is probably not the fastest or easiest way to go about it. Thinking you know someone else's job better than they do isn't either. Trying to score points to advance a policy objective at the expense of getting at the facts isn't either. We should treat this more like an investigation and less like a litigation.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">And I don't mean an investigation of each other -- a common investigation.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Greg Shatan</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:45 PM John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I may be operating under a bad assumption, if so, please correct me. My understanding is that the registries and registrars contribution to anti-abuse is in the response to complaints others make. Are there proactive measures you take against abusive domain names I should be aware of? Do you suspend abusive domains, those engaged in brand impersonation, or otherwise illegal activities based on your own initiative?<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPad<br>
<br>
On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:50 PM, Rob Golding <<a href="mailto:rob.golding@astutium.com" target="_blank">rob.golding@astutium.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>> And yet we are told by<br>
>> those who do NOT work in this field and do NOT contribute to solving<br>
>> this problem, that we don't need this information.<br>
><br>
> A number of those contributing to the discussion are registrars and web-hosts, who deal every day with abuse issues, so very much are the people who deal with "solving this problem" (and are also those telling you that WHOIS data contributes to abuse against real-people rather than abstracts)<br>
><br>
>> As far as I can tell, only the anti-abuse people have even proposed a<br>
>> compromise... whois privacy for free.<br>
><br>
> Some registrars have offered this for years, although now ICANN thinks it should control/set policy/tax that kind of service it may not remain 'free' for long, and certainly isn't free to the registrar to provide (and still leaves the GDPR issue over escrow outstanding)<br>
><br>
><br>
> Rob<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>