[council] RDS Scope Guidance

Rafik Dammak rafik.dammak at gmail.com
Fri Feb 24 23:00:04 UTC 2017

Hi James,

please find here comments suggested from NCSG:


   Whether RDS efforts meet the “legitimate needs of law enforcement,
   promoting consumer trust and safeguarding registrant data.”
   - Whether RDS effort protect the legitimate rights of registrants -
   individuals, noncommercial organizations, small businesses and others, in
   their right to communicate political, personal, research, hobby and
   educational ideas with the privacy granted under national laws and
   consistent with the best free expression traditions of the world.

   How RDS current & future recommendations might be improved and better
   coordinated for the benefit of all stakeholders.

   Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues and Implementation
   - How was the balance achieved in this long and painstaking Working
      Group? (with over 10,000 comments)
      - Has implementation under the direction of ICANN Staff and a much
      smaller team of volunteers fulfilled (or not) the goals of the PPSAI
      Working Group

   Compliance enforcement actions, structure, and processes
   - Where are the Due Process Protections for registrants?
      - Where is ICANN Compliance in ensuring that registrants know when
      their domain names are being investigated (e.g., ensuring that registrars
      contact registrants re: investigation in a timely manner and with
      information about how to respond, and if not ICANN handles this function)?
      - How does ICANN Compliance evaluate complaints for harassment and
      "bullshit factor" -- someone reporting something in the Whois record that
      does not impact the reliability of the data or the reachability of the
      registrant (e.g., a student not having a cell phone due to financial
      constraints, but otherwise COMPLETELY reachable by email, regular mail,
      - How can a registrant appeal a takedown of his/her/its domain name
      by ICANN Compliance -- and even investigate the details (registrants are
      going in circles trying to understand how their domain names disappeared).
      - What steps can Compliance take to throw out abuse by those filing
      complaints?  How can Compliance let the community know these anti-abuse
      steps are being taken?

   Availability of transparent enforcement of contractual obligations data

   The value and timing of RDAP as a replacement protocol

   The effectiveness of any other steps ICANN Org has taken to implement
   WHOIS Recommendations
   - How have changes in law, high level court decision, adoption of data
   protection laws worldwide, etc, changed the legal framework of Whois and
   RDS data since the original Whois Review Team Report and how does this
   impact ICANN's work going forward.



2017-02-21 4:31 GMT+09:00 James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com>:

> Councilors –
> Attached, please find a draft RDS Scope Guidance document, which
> consolidates the feedback received from all SOs and ACs on
> guidance/recommendations to limit the scope of the upcoming RDS (WHOIS)
> review.  Time is tight, so if you have any comments or edits, please
> respond by *2000 UTC this Friday 24 FEB.*
> Once completed, the RDS Scope Guidance document will be distributed to RDS
> Review Team applicants, to confirm that they are still interested in
> serving on this review team.  There is also a proposal to extend the call
> for applications until 7 MAR.
> Thank you,
> J.
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20170225/67879f23/attachment.html>

More information about the council mailing list