[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Reputation systems are not just nice to have (was Re: What we want redux)

[John Bambenek]

What requirements do you think we have aside of being able to access the data?

And bear in mind I want whois privacy for free so consumers can simple choose what the world sees. 

--
John Bambenek

> On Oct 3, 2017, at 16:41, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 3/10/17 2:31 pm, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:
>> 
>> To confirm and clarify your meaning... you don't think there should be
>> a WHOIS/RDS and the only means to contact a domain owner should be on
>> their website. Is that correct?
>> 
> 
> No, we are fine with registrants making some information available
> through WHOIS/RDS subject to data protection law (eg. informed consent,
> etc).  But we don't think that a starting point for the design of the
> RDS has to take the requirements of anti-abuse specialists or reputation
> systems as an essential element.
> 
> -- 
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
> 
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
> 
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
> 
> Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt
> PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg