[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois
nathalie coupet
nathaliecoupet at yahoo.com
Wed Mar 1 18:28:57 UTC 2017
FYIThe U.K. privacy office will issue guidance the first week of March for companies on obtaining consent from consumers to use their data, Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham announced Feb. 24.The Information Commissioner’s Office guidance on preparing for the European Union’s new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) privacy regime will represent “a toughening up on the rules around consent,” Denham said.In order to be legally sufficient, consent “will need to be freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous, and businesses will need to be able to prove they have it if they rely on it for processing data,” she said. A check the box approach won’t be sufficient to show valid consent, Denham said.
Nathalie
On Sunday, February 26, 2017 5:17 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche at internode.on.net> wrote:
I absolutely agree with Greg on this one. Education is key - but we need to begin with where people go for information. A Chamber of Commerce, a small business association, legal aid centres, consumer groups? Yes, off point, but at some point, an important piece of the puzzle
Holly
On 27 Feb 2017, at 6:31 am, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
We don't need to get caught up as a WG in "best practices," which is just a rabbit-hole.
Personally, what I think is needed is education and readily available resources, in plain English (and the other ICANN languages).
Better practices will result from better-informed people on all sides of the equation. The more facts we can supply to more people, the better off we all are.
How many of us have talked to generally well-informed people who consider themselves "Internet-savvy," yet they don't know where gTLDs come from (the stork?), the difference between a registry and a registrar, the difference between a registrar and a reseller, a domain name and a website and an email address, etc., etc.? Add to this people who have bad information (which can be worse than no information at all).
So many people who actually interface with this "structure" need to know much more than they do (and/or correct the misinformation and misconceptions they have). Sub-optimal practices often come from ignorance, not a reasoned choice to act in a sub-optimal manner (though that happens too...).
The other part of the education equation is to figure out where the target audience (people who need to be better informed) gets their information from. For most, it's not the ICANN website. It's something local to them, where the get general business or technical information -- their employer, a trade association, a blog, Facebook, etc., etc. We need to educate people where they are -- "build it and they will come" will not reach anyone other than the most enthusiastic or proactive.
Anyway, this is probably off-topic at this point, but my point is that we don't need to worry about "best practices" or other voluntary or proscriptive activities. If we can better educate the average person who comes in contact with the structure behind the websites and emails they interact with, the concerns that lead to these questions will diminish greatly.
Greg
GregShatan
C: 917-816-6428
S: gsshatan
Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428
gregshatanipc at gmail.com
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:
Thanks for the good response Stephanie. Your early warning is taken. Any consideration of best practices will require us to remember it and evaluate it diligently. Chuck From: Stephanie Perrin [mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail. utoronto.ca]
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2017 12:03 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com>; gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois
I was merely registering the fact that in general, the NCSG has become concerned when contracted parties, either in consultation with ICANN's compliance department, or on their own, develop best practices outside the regular PDP process. I think Ayden responded with a good example, and while I appreciate the detail into which Greg went in taking apart Ayden's argument, I think it is a wee bit misplaced at the moment. This is getting off topic.Simply put, 1. John Horton asked if it was within our remit to establish the chain of authority in cases of abuse, and whether we should develop a best practice guide in how to pursue a complaint. (given that ICANN has no authority over hosting providers, I would suggest that the answer to that is no)2, You responded that we could make recommendations about how to pursue a complaint, for use on a voluntary basis.3. While I don't question the relatively innocuous nature of the suggestion, and the fact that such a guide would doubtless be useful and helpful given the complexity of the chain of responsibiilty described below, I am merely giving early warning that the NCSG is concerned about "voluntary best practices". Stephanie Perrin On 2017-02-25 07:43, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Stephanie. I am not at all clear about what you are concerned about here. I was simply responding to a question John asked about WG scope. ICANN org nor ICANN community has not asked or suggested that various contracted parties do anything in this regard. Various WG members have simply been sharing some ideas about education of users that might be helpful. I personally think it is pretty early to get concerned and that it would be better to wait until we see if this discussion goes anywhere. In the meantime I think it is important for WG members to float ideas for possible future consideration or not. We will filter them to make sure they are in scope; some will be pursued further and some not and the ones we pursue further will be vetted by the full WG so there will be plenty of opportunity to everyone to contribute. In particular, if and when the WG decides to consider any possible best practices, we will have to evaluate whether there might be risk of coercion. Chuck From:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann. org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg- bounces at icann.org]On Behalf Of Stephanie Perrin
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 10:23 PM
To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois I have not consulted my SG yet, but I think I can safely say that we are getting quite concerned about what ICANN is asking/suggesting its various contracted parties do on a voluntary basis. Best practice, particularly in an unregulated environment, becomes coercive.Stephanie Perrin On 2017-02-24 18:09, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Thanks for explaining John. Below is my opinion on ‘on whether it's appropriate for this group to make a determination about this "chain of responsibility" as part of our work.’ As someone else has already pointed out, ICANN has no relationship with hosting providers so it would be out of scope for consensus policy. But I don’t think that that would prevent the WG from making some recommendations along the lines that are being discussed that could be implemented on a voluntary basis. I ask staff and others to correct me if they think I am wrong on this. Chuck From: John Horton [mailto:john.horton@ legitscript.com]
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 11:12 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com>
Cc: vgreimann at key-systems.net;gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois Hi Chuck, Sure. What I'm asking you to determine is whether it is within the ambit of this group's mission to do, or come to a consensus on, the following:
- "Establish(ing) chains of responsibility in the data," in the context of submitting complaints or resolving issues with a website or domain name
, and determining "registrar obligations" in response to those abuse complaints.
- Either alternatively or simultaneously, developing or providing a "how to guide" or "guidance" "for going forward with a complaint."
Concretely, I think the point is to formalize the notion that "registrars" shouldn't have to do the "hosting provider's job" and to "direct a lot of traffic away from the registrar." For example, one "chain of responsibility" that this group might seek to establish would be to direct, suggest or advise that a registrant should be contacted first, then the hosting provider, and only then the registrar. What I'm asking for is a determination on whether it's appropriate for this group to make a determination about this "chain of responsibility" as part of our work. From my perspective, it is outside the scope of our mission, so trying to discuss it, persuade each other or come to a consensus on it in this group isn't apropos. If this is something that is requested by the ICANN board as part of the RDS's group and any report we issue, or if it's appropriately within the ambit, it would be helpful to clarify that and also the scope. Let me know if I'm not clearly summarizing what I'm asking you to rule on. Thanks,
John Horton
President and CEO, LegitScript FollowLegitScript:LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Blog | Google+ On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 6:53 AM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:
John, Can you clarify what you want a ruling on? Chuck From:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann. org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg- bounces at icann.org]On Behalf Of John Horton
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 8:41 AM
To: Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois Let me provide a few comments on that.
- I like Volker's idea of including hosting details in the ultimate RDS. It's additional information, which may be useful to the viewer. From a concrete use-case perspective, when I or one of my analysts is evaluating whether a merchant should be boarded with a bank or rejected based on risk, it's certainly one of the details we look it. (I'm not sure it's technically "registration data," but not sure if that matters.)
- I object to using the RDS (or this group) to establish chains or a hierarchy of responsibility as being outside of our scope and mandate. (Chuck, maybe we can get a ruling on that?) I realize that there are members of this group who believe that a complainant should always go to the registrant first, then the host, and only the registrar as a last resort (some believe never). But that's not how everyone feels. Others believe it should be the payment processor first. Still others believe the registrar should be the first point of contact for a complaint. Still others believe there is no hierarchy and it's a case-by-case solution and all facilitators are equally valid points of contact. My point is not to get into an argument about who is right there (I and I'm sure many others don't have the time, and many of us have discussed this elsewhere); I simply don't think we should be using this group to try and resolve that particular issue, or impose some sort of a structure on internet users, because I think it's probably outside the scope of our mandate (and I will strongly note that I don't think there's consensus on that issue).
Chuck, if I'm wrong and it's inside the scope of our mandate to use the RDS to establish a structure about who a complainant should approach first, second, third, fourth, etc. let us know, but if it's in scope, that's going to be a somewhat different discussion. Again, my objective here isn't to launch another 100-email debate about who is right or wrong; my objective is to argue that a) the idea of including hosting information in the RDS seems like a pretty reasonable one, but b) doing that in order to impose rules on internet users on what complaint hierarchy they should follow is out of scope for our mandate.
John Horton
President and CEO, LegitScript FollowLegitScript:LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Blog | Google+ On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net> wrote:
So should we maybe include hosting details in the ultimate RDS? These would have to be supplied differently, but it would make sense if we want to establish chains of responsibility in the data.
Am 20.02.2017 um 14:20 schrieb theo geurts:
Good point Michele,
RDS should be a facilitating here in the sense that reports end up at the correct party and yet give the reporter a logical natural flow in creating the report without creating confusion with different set of contacts.
Theo
On 20-2-2017 12:24, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
Volker
From our perspective the frustration is when the client (registrant) has their details in whois and / or on the website and the complainant makes zero attempt to contact them. The first we hear about the alleged issues is when I get a 100 page takedown notice on my desk.
So if they can at least attempt to contact the website operator then it makes our lives a lot easier.
As the hosting provider we *should* have details of how to reach the site owner, but not always, as we also offer dedicated servers, colo etc., but we’ll know who the IPs are assigned to
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
------------------------------ -
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
On 20/02/2017, 11:21, "Volker Greimann" <vgreimann at key-systems.net> wrote:
Agreed. The question is who is next if the details are not available. If
it is content, the next port of call should be the host as the host has
the ability to remove said content and also bears certain legal
obligations in case of obvious violations while the registrar does not.
As the registrar may not even know the actual registrant, for example
for registrations under third party privacy services, it does not even
make sense to contact the registrar.
Best,
Volker
Am 20.02.2017 um 12:08 schrieb Michele Neylon - Blacknight:
> Volker
>
> The key thing is the sequence.
> If the contact’s details are available either via whois OR on the website then they’re the first port of call.
>
> Regards
>
> Michele
>
>
> --
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
> https://www.blacknight.com/
> http://blacknight.blog/
> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
> ------------------------------ -
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
>
> On 20/02/2017, 10:46, "Volker Greimann" <vgreimann at key-systems.net> wrote:
>
> Well, the registrant may not be the right contact in all cases,
> especially if it comes down to subdomains. But yes, if the registrant is
> known, then he should probably be contacted right after a known website
> operator. But if the registrant is unknown, the next contact should be
> the host as he is closer to the alleged violation than the registrar.
>
> Best,
>
> Volker
>
>
>
>
> Am 20.02.2017 um 11:28 schrieb Michele Neylon - Blacknight:
> > Volker
> >
> > Really?
> > As a hosting provider I’d strongly disagree.
> >
> > If you’ve got a problem with content on a website you should contact the registrant first.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Michele
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mr Michele Neylon
> > Blacknight Solutions
> > Hosting, Colocation & Domains
> > https://www.blacknight.com/
> > http://blacknight.blog/
> > Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
> > Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
> > Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
> > Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
> > ------------------------------ -
> > Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
> > Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
> >
> > On 20/02/2017, 09:54, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@ icann.org on behalf of Volker Greimann" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@ icann.org on behalf of vgreimann at key-systems.net> wrote:
> >
> > When you say web site, it should be taken up with the web host not the
> > registrar as the registrant is not necessarily the correct content.
> >
> > Problems with domain -> registrant
> >
> > Problems with content -> Web host
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Volker
> >
> >
> > Am 17.02.2017 um 20:49 schrieb Mark Svancarek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg:
> > > Counter example
> > > "Joe" has a web site which is used to abuse my trademark. I can't contact Joe because his thin data is incorrect or hidden (I don't know that Joe is actually Joe.). I then contact the registrar. They follow up with the privacy proxy service if needed. Hopefully all this happens quickly and the cease and desist message is actually delivered.
> > >
> > > In actual practice, there is a noteworthy difference in effectiveness if we have to go through the registrar, compared to us contacting directly. If the registrar isn't responsive, then I may have to pressure ICANN to enforce the registrar contract, which has its own issues.
> > >
> > > In either case, your abuse of my trademark is probably a civil issue, so starting with law enforcement isn't a great option, even if they had the inclination and bandwidth to help out in a timely fashion.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: benny at nordreg.se [mailto:benny at nordreg.se]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 9:41 AM
> > > To: Mark Svancarek <marksv at microsoft.com>
> > > Cc: RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois
> > >
> > > Let us take a simple example
> > >
> > > A phone number can you as the one it's registered on choose by yourself if it shall be published in the phone book, if you give the number to someone it's your choice as an individual! If the police want your number they will get without to much effort.
> > >
> > > So why on earth are we forcing registrants to give up this right to choose to whom they share that info?
> > >
> > > Forget what Whois are as we know it and come up with ideas how we can make a new system which takes reasonable interest of all sides here.
> > >
> > > The Status Quo hammering are not productive at all.
> > >
> > > RDS are meant to make change to the better!
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > >> On 17 Feb 2017, at 18:28, Mark Svancarek <marksv at microsoft.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Spam and DDOS will always be with us, and the need to mitigate them does not eliminate the need to have public data. It seems orthogonal to me.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann. org
> > >> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg- bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
> > >> benny at nordreg.se
> > >> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 8:25 AM
> > >> To: RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> > >> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois
> > >>
> > >> Another post about the problems with public whois
> > >>
> > >> How anyone here can still defend this abuse of info as a the best system I have serious problems understanding.
> > >>
> > >> http://domainnamewire.com/ 2017/02/16/control-block-sms- spam-robocallin
> > >> g-based-whois-info/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Med vänliga hälsningar / Kind Regards / Med vennlig hilsen
> > >>
> > >> Benny Samuelsen
> > >> Registry Manager - Domainexpert
> > >>
> > >> Nordreg AB - ICANN accredited registrar
> > >> IANA-ID: 638
> > >> Phone: +46.42197080
> > >> Direct: +47.32260201
> > >> Mobile: +47.40410200
> > >>
> > >>> On 17 Feb 2017, at 14:55, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Allison
> > >>>
> > >>> As others have said, if you have an issue please report it to ICANN,
> > >>> law enforcement, consumer protection etc., Some of us take our obligations very seriously and lumping all registrars and providers into one big bucket isn't very helpful for constructive dialogue.
> > >>> We get a number of whois complaints from ICANN every year and we investigate each and every one of them. In some cases it's very obvious that the details provided are bogus, but in others it's not and we have to spend time energy and effort going back and forth with our client and ICANN to resolve it. Sometimes this leads to domains being suspended or deleted, sometimes the whois gets updated, sometimes the complaint is denied. But each complaint is handled on its merits.
> > >>>
> > >>> We also have a whois privacy service. It is NOT a fake address. You can check it in the Irish company office:
> > >>> https://search.cro.ie/company/ CompanyDetails.aspx?id=480317& type=C
> > >>>
> > >>> Now you may not like that people and organisations choose to obfuscate their contact details via services like that one, but that's a different issue entirely. I also personally have correspondence addresses in the US, mainland UK and a couple in Northern Ireland. I don't live at any of them, but you can send me physical mail and I will get it. You could argue that the address is "fake", but as I can get mail to it I'd suspect that in many cases it'd be considered valid.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>>
> > >>> Michele
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Mr Michele Neylon
> > >>> Blacknight Solutions
> > >>> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
> > >>> https://www.blacknight.com/
> > >>> http://blacknight.blog/
> > >>> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
> > >>> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
> > >>> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
> > >>> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
> > >>> ------------------------------ -
> > >>> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
> > >>> Park,Sleaty
> > >>> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
> > >>> ______________________________ _________________
> > >>> 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
> >
> > --
> > Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
> >
> > Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
> >
> > Volker A. Greimann
> > - Rechtsabteilung -
> >
> > Key-Systems GmbH
> > Im Oberen Werk 1
> > 66386 St. Ingbert
> > Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> > Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> > Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
> >
> > Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
> > www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
> >
> > Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> > www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> > www.twitter.com/key_systems
> >
> > Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
> > Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> > Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
> >
> > Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> > www.keydrive.lu
> >
> > Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
> >
> > ------------------------------ --------------
> >
> > Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Volker A. Greimann
> > - legal department -
> >
> > Key-Systems GmbH
> > Im Oberen Werk 1
> > 66386 St. Ingbert
> > Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> > Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> > Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
> >
> > Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
> > www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
> >
> > Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
> > www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> > www.twitter.com/key_systems
> >
> > CEO: Alexander Siffrin
> > Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> > V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
> >
> > Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> > www.keydrive.lu
> >
> > This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________ _________________
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/ listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
> >
> >
>
> --
> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - Rechtsabteilung -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>
> ------------------------------ --------------
>
> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - legal department -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>
>
>
>
>
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
------------------------------ --------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
______________________________ _________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/ listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
------------------------------ --------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
______________________________ _________________
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 listgnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.orghttps://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
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170301/5b80753f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list