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

[allison nixon]

I think there's a 4th camp, people who want to shut down WHOIS entirely for
reasons that i don't quite understand. It's very puzzling that people keep
arguing to remove every single data element even if it has nothing to do
with abuse or privacy, even if it actually makes the system much harder to
troubleshoot or even breaks it. I don't think privacy is the motivation
when those requests are made.

On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 10:18 AM, 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
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>



-- 
_________________________________
Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170616/a2f4a6ef/attachment.html>