[Accred-Model] Version 1.6 of the Accreditation and Access Model

[benny at nordreg.se]

“ I realize that a few people might wish otherwise but we can't always have what we want.”


Could you just worked according to that thought for the last 2 years on RDS we would have been done with a solution!

Blame autocorrect for any strange answers

On 20 Jun 2018, at 17:15, John R. Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

>> I think Mike has come up with a reasonable solution, although the numbers are low. If I have to replace my phone number because it is out there now, $250 does not cover my trouble.  This is the fundamental problem with privacy loss, it is often impossible to be made whole.
> 
> In the unlikely event that I decided to pay one of these $250 fines rather than just ignoring it, I would of course want assurance that paying the fine ends my liability for whatever the violation was.  So the victim needs to agree to waive further claims.  What if the victim doesn't want to do that?  What if the victim's national law doesn't let them waive privacy claims?
> 
> This whole thing is beyond unworkable.  The only actual remedy we have against violators is to revoke their access.  I realize that a few people might wish otherwise but we can't always have what we want.
> 
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
> _______________________________________________
> Accred-Model mailing list
> Accred-Model at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accred-model