[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] List topics for this week

[John Bambenek]

I don't mind changing whois. I mind the concept that we need to engineer a huge new database system to solve what really is a customer education / business process problem. Whatever costs are associated with having whois pales in comparison to the costs in developing and maintaining the RDS system envisioned by the previous effort. 

One of the main reasons (but by no means only) I am a Domaintools customer is so I can get domain info in a normalized and consistent manner for use in automated processing against security and **privacy** threats. By all means, lets normalize data and create **reasonable**[1] accommodation for privacy laws. 

--
John Bambenek

[1] - Reasonable includes making decisions that don't literally break the internet. 

> On Jun 16, 2017, at 09:18, Paul Keating <paul at law.es> wrote:
> 
> So I seem to see three camps here. 
> 
> 1. Those who want not change to a system that has worked for 20 years or whatever. 
> 
> 2. Those who object to the current WHOIS on the basis of privacy issues. 
> 
> 2. Those who really want a way to monetize the data at issue instead of allowing it to be available without charge. 
> 
> Am I missing something here?
> 
> If not then perhaps these divisions can actually help us all move forward. 
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> Paul Keating, Esq.
> 
>> On Jun 16, 2017, at 2:41 PM, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org> wrote:
>> 
>> One, it is not enforced taxation, it is a requirement that was present in the contract and a requirement BEFORE you got into the business. It isn't something imposed out of the blue one day. It has literally been there for decades. 
>> 
>> Two, is it really necessary to make your point with crude sexual analogies (or am I mistaken as to what you meant by BDSM)?
>> 
>> --
>> John Bambenek
>> 
>>>> On Jun 16, 2017, at 04:01, Rob Golding <rob.golding at astutium.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 2017-06-15 17:43, Chen, Tim wrote:
>>>> Using the arguments you have made about individual control over PII,
>>>> what right does my chosen registrar or registry have to get
>>>> compensated for my whois data?   Put another way, I get your point
>>>> about 'recompense to registrants' but I don't understand how you can
>>>> add in '& registrars & registries' unless an individual has explicitly
>>>> given permission to those companies to monetize their whois data?
>>> 
>>> It was bereft of significant design consideration/comment over the "systems and processing", but to me, I would expect that someone has to collect/protect the data, run the system(s), distribute the (probably micro-)payments, provide audit/reports and so on - those things cost money, so was anticipating a sort-of revenue share model, rather than direct monetisation as such
>>> 
>>> If we're going to have a "next-gen" RDS, why not make it a benefit to the registrants, rather than compounding the current system of enforced taxation for mandatory port-43 based BDSM we have now.
>>> 
>>> 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