From olof.nordling at icann.org Mon Feb 14 12:49:43 2011 From: olof.nordling at icann.org (Olof Nordling) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 04:49:43 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] San Francisco meeting plans - WIPO speaker? In-Reply-To: <20110211130006.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.17c9c11caa.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> References: <20110211130006.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.17c9c11caa.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7E5D08DC1BC@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Lynn, Emily, all, I have mailed Erik Wilbers at WIPO to hear about their SFO attendance and availability for a meeting with the Review Team. Will revert as soon as I hear back from him. All the best Olof From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 9:00 PM To: Emily Taylor Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: [Rt4-whois] San Francisco meeting plans - WIPO speaker? Hi Emily, Typically WIPO has representatives attending ICANN meetings. Suggesting that we try to get someone on our agenda to share the use of WHOIS information for the UDRP process. Perhaps the ICANN staff could assist? Best regards, Lynn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110214/202ef003/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Mon Feb 14 12:54:02 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:54:02 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] San Francisco meeting plans - WIPO speaker? In-Reply-To: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7E5D08DC1BC@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> References: <20110211130006.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.17c9c11caa.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7E5D08DC1BC@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Message-ID: <790607D3-4D75-441B-BF81-3ED8AECA134B@etlaw.co.uk> Thanks Olof, and Lynn, thank you for this suggestion. Kind regards Emily On 14 Feb 2011, at 12:49, Olof Nordling wrote: > Lynn, Emily, all, > I have mailed Erik Wilbers at WIPO to hear about their SFO attendance and availability for a meeting with the Review Team. Will revert as soon as I hear back from him. > All the best > Olof > > From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Oflynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com > Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 9:00 PM > To: Emily Taylor > Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org > Subject: [Rt4-whois] San Francisco meeting plans - WIPO speaker? > > Hi Emily, > Typically WIPO has representatives attending ICANN meetings. > Suggesting that we try to get someone on our agenda to share the use of WHOIS information for the UDRP process. > Perhaps the ICANN staff could assist? > Best regards, > Lynn 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110214/7d585caf/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Tue Feb 15 09:42:53 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:42:53 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] SF draft agenda for team comment Message-ID: <7617AB7A-4B92-4AEB-A0AE-3BE8AE636042@etlaw.co.uk> Dear all I attach a draft agenda for our meetings in San Francisco. Kathy and I have pulled these ideas together following extensive discussion together, working on a draft created by Alice. We're keen to have your input, so please let us have any comments. We can also discuss during our call tomorrow. Also, thanks to Susan and Bill who have kindly offered to organise a dinner for us on the Sunday evening. Best regards, Emily 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/b89abe96/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SF Mtg - WHOIS Agendas - Draft for comment.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 131964 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/b89abe96/SFMtg-WHOISAgendas-Draftforcomment.docx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/b89abe96/attachment-0001.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Tue Feb 15 10:57:34 2011 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:57:34 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Conference Call Audio-cast Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please feel free to advertise and circulate the conference call audio-cast - http://stream.icann.org:8000/whois.m3u to your constituencies or to individuals interested in your activities. Kindly note that this information is available on the wiki. Thanks, Best regards Alice -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/f4ac0661/attachment.html From kim at vonarx.ca Tue Feb 15 17:16:54 2011 From: kim at vonarx.ca (Kim G. von Arx) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:16:54 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Telephone conference tmw Message-ID: <600E96DA-0A04-4602-AC50-7E33DD3626CA@vonarx.ca> Dear All: My apologies, but I won't be able to attend the call tomorrow. I had sent a proposed revised definition to the Law Enforcement team a few days ago, but have not heard back with respect to that revisions. I can't find that email any more, but I think the below is the final definition that I had sent around to the sub-team. Lutz, Sharon do you still have the latest draft that I had sent? "Law enforcement shall be defined as a municipality, department, division, section, branch, body corporate, foundation, or association of a nationally or internationally recognized government and whoes responsibility is to maintain, co-ordinate, and enforce laws, regulations, or multi-national treaty obligations within the internationally recognized authorized boundaries of such government" For applicable law, we have done some work with respect to the the definition of "applicable law" but I am not sure whether there is any agreement on my proposed definition. Here is what I had proposed. Please note that I have not received feedback from the sub-team on this as of yet so this is just a proposal from me and to give the RT an update on our work so far. I am sure that Omar, Mikhael, and Lynn will be abel to speak to it further during the call tomorrow. "any and all State laws that regulate and/or control the collection, use, access, and disclosure of personally identifiable information and shall also include internationally recognized legal norms such as the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the U.N.Guidelines for the Regulation of Computerized Personal Data Files." Kim __________________________________ kim at vonarx.ca +1 (613) 286-4445 "Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars..." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/39e6d817/attachment.html From kKleiman at pir.org Tue Feb 15 17:26:35 2011 From: kKleiman at pir.org (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:26:35 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Telephone conference tmw In-Reply-To: <600E96DA-0A04-4602-AC50-7E33DD3626CA@vonarx.ca> References: <600E96DA-0A04-4602-AC50-7E33DD3626CA@vonarx.ca> Message-ID: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760586FB4CCA@pir-mail-01> Hi Kim, Sorry you can't join us, and tx you for your email. Question to the Law Enforcement and Applicable Law subteams - do the definitions below represent the most recent version, changes based on last meeting, and what you would like to put out for public comment? If not, could you kindly pass them around among the subteam (and feel free to include Emily and me) for input? Might it be possible to finalize them before the call tomorrow? Best and tx! Kathy From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kim G. von Arx Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 12:17 PM To: rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Telephone conference tmw Dear All: My apologies, but I won't be able to attend the call tomorrow. I had sent a proposed revised definition to the Law Enforcement team a few days ago, but have not heard back with respect to that revisions. I can't find that email any more, but I think the below is the final definition that I had sent around to the sub-team. Lutz, Sharon do you still have the latest draft that I had sent? "Law enforcement shall be defined as a municipality, department, division, section, branch, body corporate, foundation, or association of a nationally or internationally recognized government and whoes responsibility is to maintain, co-ordinate, and enforce laws, regulations, or multi-national treaty obligations within the internationally recognized authorized boundaries of such government" For applicable law, we have done some work with respect to the the definition of "applicable law" but I am not sure whether there is any agreement on my proposed definition. Here is what I had proposed. Please note that I have not received feedback from the sub-team on this as of yet so this is just a proposal from me and to give the RT an update on our work so far. I am sure that Omar, Mikhael, and Lynn will be abel to speak to it further during the call tomorrow. "any and all State laws that regulate and/or control the collection, use, access, and disclosure of personally identifiable information and shall also include internationally recognized legal norms such as the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the U.N.Guidelines for the Regulation of Computerized Personal Data Files." Kim __________________________________ kim at vonarx.ca +1 (613) 286-4445 "Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars..." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/d7f73ea4/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Tue Feb 15 17:38:22 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:38:22 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Call tomorrow Message-ID: <56C4AEAF-4882-4E46-A620-E6E5DEFAF1A2@etlaw.co.uk> Hi everyone A reminder of our proposed agenda tomorrow (repeated below). I didn't receive any comments on it, but after sending it out, I had an exchange with Denise Michel who reminded me that her team are awaiting finalisation of the questions we'd like ICANN staff to answer for us, so I've added that as agenda item 6. According to our action plan, we will be publishing the call for public comment in the middle of February, so I would like us tomorrow to sign off on the definitions and any questions for that public comment. Please be reminded that the time of the call is now 14:00 UTC on Wednesday 16 February Best regards, Emily Objectives: 1. To finalise working definitions and questions for public comment (subteams C, D, E, F), to be published by 15 February. 2. To monitor progress on subteams A and B (Policy and Implementation), and set priorities for the teams for the coming months. Generally, as a rolling target, can we circulate papers by the end of the Monday before each call, to give everyone a chance to consider the issues in advance of the call. Agenda: 1. Roll Call and apologies 2. Adoption of meeting notes from last call 3. San Francisco draft agenda (comments and input from team 15 minutes - Kathy and I will post a draft by the beginning of next week). 4. Report from Sub teams on Definitions and Proposed questions for public comment: Law Enforcement Applicable Laws Consumer Trust Producers/Maintainers 5. Progress and priority setting: Policy Implementation 6. Questions for ICANN staff. 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/f63c9190/attachment.html From omar at kaminski.adv.br Tue Feb 15 17:42:31 2011 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:42:31 -0200 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Telephone conference tmw In-Reply-To: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760586FB4CCA@pir-mail-01> References: <600E96DA-0A04-4602-AC50-7E33DD3626CA@vonarx.ca> <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760586FB4CCA@pir-mail-01> Message-ID: Dear Kathy, As applicable laws subteam member, I believe this definition covers what should be discussed later on. The balance between privacy and (reasons for) disclosure should be equalized whenever possible. All the best from .br, Omar 2011/2/15 Kathy Kleiman : > Hi Kim, > > Sorry you can?t join us, and tx you for your email. Question to the Law > Enforcement and Applicable Law subteams ? do the definitions below represent > the most recent version, changes based on last meeting, and what you would > like to put out for public comment? > > > > If not, could you kindly pass them around among the subteam (and feel free > to include Emily and me) for input?? Might it be possible to finalize them > before the call tomorrow? > > > > Best and tx! > > Kathy > > > > From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On > Behalf Of Kim G. von Arx > Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 12:17 PM > To: rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS > Subject: [Rt4-whois] Telephone conference tmw > > > > Dear All: > > > > My apologies, but I won't be able to attend the call tomorrow. > > > > I had sent a proposed revised definition to the Law Enforcement team a few > days ago, but have not heard back with respect to that revisions. ?I can't > find that email any more, but I think the below is the final definition that > I had sent around to the sub-team. ?Lutz, Sharon do you still have the > latest draft that I had sent? > > > > "Law enforcement shall be defined as a municipality, department,?division, > section, branch, body corporate, foundation, or?association?of a nationally > or internationally recognized government ?and?whoes responsibility is to > maintain, co-ordinate, and enforce ?laws,?regulations, or multi-national > treaty obligations within the?internationally recognized?authorized > boundaries of such government" > > > > For applicable law, we have done some work with respect to the the > definition of "applicable law" but I am not sure whether there is any > agreement on my proposed definition. ?Here is what I had proposed. ?Please > note that I have not received feedback from the sub-team on this as of yet > so this is just a proposal from me and to give the RT an update on our work > so far. ?I am sure that Omar, Mikhael, and Lynn will be abel to speak to it > further during the call tomorrow. > > > > "any and all State laws that regulate and/or control the collection, use, > access, and disclosure of personally?identifiable information and shall also > include internationally recognized legal norms such as the U.N. > Universal?Declaration of Human Rights and the?U.N.Guidelines?for the > Regulation of Computerized Personal Data Files." > > > > > > Kim > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > kim at vonarx.ca > > +1 (613) 286-4445 > > > > "Shoot for the moon. ?Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars..." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > From omar at kaminski.adv.br Tue Feb 15 17:45:50 2011 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:45:50 -0200 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] REMINDER / IRD-WG outreach invitation In-Reply-To: References: <001701cbc710$e26512b0$a72f3810$@icann.org> Message-ID: Dear RT members, I ask permission to forward this email from ALAC, observing that "internationalization of registration data" could, or even should, impact on "applicable laws". Best from .br, Omar ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN At-Large Staff Date: 2011/2/15 Subject: [ALAC-Announce] REMINDER / IRD-WG outreach invitation To: "alac-announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org" Dear All, Please see below information on two webinars scheduled for TOMORROW, 16 February that will discuss the interim report of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG). ** Dear ICANN community, On 26 June 2009 the ICANN Board approved a resolution (2009.06.26.18: ) requesting that the GNSO and the SSAC, in consultation with staff, convene an Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) comprised of individuals with knowledge, expertise, and experience in these areas to study the feasibility and suitability of introducing display specifications to deal with the internationalization of registration data. The working group has produced an interim report that discusses several potential models for internationalizing domain registration data, and is seeking feedback from the community about the models and on other key questions via a Public Forum that is open until 14 March 2011. ?See the link at http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#ird. The working group will provide an online briefing (webinar) on February 16 2011 at 14.00 and 20.00 UTC. ?We welcome the community's participation. The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run for 60 minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, the slides and MP3 will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff is always available to answer any questions that you email to policy-staff at icann.org . In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org ) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join, 14.00 UTC or 20.00 UTC (to convert those times into your local time, see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html ). We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff members e-mail address. Warm regards, ICANN Policy Development Support ** Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, ICANN At-Large Staff _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org From kKleiman at pir.org Tue Feb 15 18:25:14 2011 From: kKleiman at pir.org (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:25:14 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] REMINDER / IRD-WG outreach invitation In-Reply-To: References: <001701cbc710$e26512b0$a72f3810$@icann.org> Message-ID: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760586FB4CD8@pir-mail-01> Of course, and thanks, Omar! Kathy -----Original Message----- From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Omar Kaminski Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 12:46 PM To: rt4-whois Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] REMINDER / IRD-WG outreach invitation Dear RT members, I ask permission to forward this email from ALAC, observing that "internationalization of registration data" could, or even should, impact on "applicable laws". Best from .br, Omar ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN At-Large Staff Date: 2011/2/15 Subject: [ALAC-Announce] REMINDER / IRD-WG outreach invitation To: "alac-announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org" Dear All, Please see below information on two webinars scheduled for TOMORROW, 16 February that will discuss the interim report of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG). ** Dear ICANN community, On 26 June 2009 the ICANN Board approved a resolution (2009.06.26.18: ) requesting that the GNSO and the SSAC, in consultation with staff, convene an Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) comprised of individuals with knowledge, expertise, and experience in these areas to study the feasibility and suitability of introducing display specifications to deal with the internationalization of registration data. The working group has produced an interim report that discusses several potential models for internationalizing domain registration data, and is seeking feedback from the community about the models and on other key questions via a Public Forum that is open until 14 March 2011. ?See the link at http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#ird. The working group will provide an online briefing (webinar) on February 16 2011 at 14.00 and 20.00 UTC. ?We welcome the community's participation. The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run for 60 minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, the slides and MP3 will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff is always available to answer any questions that you email to policy-staff at icann.org . In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org ) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join, 14.00 UTC or 20.00 UTC (to convert those times into your local time, see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html ). We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff members e-mail address. Warm regards, ICANN Policy Development Support ** Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, ICANN At-Large Staff _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Feb 16 06:56:14 2011 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 23:56:14 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Existing WHOIS Policy Message-ID: <20110215235614.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.02bbbdb779.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/8cd72bb3/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Feb 16 06:56:18 2011 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 23:56:18 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Definitions Message-ID: <20110215235618.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.72f0c0f9b4.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110215/e2755a68/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Feb 16 07:04:00 2011 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 00:04:00 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] SF draft agenda for team comment Message-ID: <20110216000400.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.8885102bef.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/540725ee/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Wed Feb 16 09:33:24 2011 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 01:33:24 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] pictures In-Reply-To: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7E5D0E53941@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please find attached Stacy's pictures of the dinner party in London. Thanks, Stacy! Best regards Alice From: Stacy Burnette > Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:27:49 -0800 To: Alice Jansen > Cc: Liz Gasster >, Denise Michel > Subject: Please share the attached pictures with the Whois Review Team Best, Stacy Burnette -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 001[3].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 802788 bytes Desc: 001[3].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0013.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 002[4].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 728789 bytes Desc: 002[4].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0024.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 003[2].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 408172 bytes Desc: 003[2].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0032.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 004[2].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 536125 bytes Desc: 004[2].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0042.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 005[1].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 654579 bytes Desc: 005[1].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0051.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 006[3].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 609343 bytes Desc: 006[3].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0063.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 007[2].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 608768 bytes Desc: 007[2].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0072.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 008[2].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 600319 bytes Desc: 008[2].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0082.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 009[2].jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 670646 bytes Desc: 009[2].jpg Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/7cae869d/0092.jpg From alice.jansen at icann.org Wed Feb 16 11:06:27 2011 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:06:27 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Preliminary Report - for your consideration Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please find attached the meeting notes from your last call. This is for your consideration ? please review and circulate your editing requirements to the Team. Thanks, Best regards Alice -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/8ba9d757/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Prel Rep - 2 Feb .doc Type: application/x-msword Size: 39936 bytes Desc: Prel Rep - 2 Feb .doc Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/8ba9d757/PrelRep-2Feb.doc From alice.jansen at icann.org Wed Feb 16 13:55:11 2011 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 05:55:11 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Adobe Room Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please be kindly reminded to join the Adobe Connect room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/ No password required ? please enter as "guest". Thanks, Best regards Alice -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/81758cfd/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Feb 16 13:59:40 2011 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 06:59:40 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] pictures Message-ID: <20110216065940.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.ce06b22b32.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/f967f674/attachment.html From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Wed Feb 16 16:05:32 2011 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 09:05:32 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Law Enforcement & Applicable Laws Message-ID: <25C63396-14ED-4C13-9236-09699E04B5E3@paypal.com> First, I believe the definitions as presented reasonably capture the sentiment of most, if not all, members of the Review Team (including me). My concern is not with the definitions per se, but rather how they might be used in other contexts. For example, are the "legitimate needs of law enforcement" constrained by Applicable Laws? Are ICANN's compliance efforts similarly constrained? From omar at kaminski.adv.br Wed Feb 16 16:47:44 2011 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:47:44 -0200 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Adobe Room In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear RT members, My excuses for not attending the conference call. I had an emergency - a flood in the garage. Too much rain on the last couple of days. Best, Omar 2011/2/16 Alice Jansen : > Dear Review Team Members, > Please be kindly reminded to join the Adobe Connect > room:?http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/ > No password required ? please enter as "guest". > Thanks, > Best regards > Alice > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > From lutz at iks-jena.de Wed Feb 16 17:08:35 2011 From: lutz at iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:08:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Rt4-whois] Law Enforcement & Applicable Laws References: <25C63396-14ED-4C13-9236-09699E04B5E3@paypal.com> Message-ID: * Smith, Bill wrote: > First, I believe the definitions as presented reasonably capture > the sentiment of most, if not all, members of the Review Team > (including me). Thank you for this approval. > My concern is not with the definitions per se, but rather how they > might be used in other contexts. Current policies does not set up special rules for law enforcement as far as I can see. > For example, are the "legitimate > needs of law enforcement" constrained by Applicable Laws? Of course. That is the instrinctive nature of governmental executive bodies: They are bound to the law. Private cooperations are also bound to the local applicable law. But I misread your question. The term "applicable law" in our context deals with the laws for the normal business processes in domain registration and maintainence: The generation and maintainence of whois data. Your question is about access to whois data. That's a different issue. From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Wed Feb 16 17:40:09 2011 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 10:40:09 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Law Enforcement & Applicable Laws In-Reply-To: References: <25C63396-14ED-4C13-9236-09699E04B5E3@paypal.com> Message-ID: <6CF5A2F2-6C13-4276-B810-CBA7456FB097@paypal.com> Comments inline: On Feb 16, 2011, at 9:08 AM, Lutz Donnerhacke wrote: > * Smith, Bill wrote: >> First, I believe the definitions as presented reasonably capture >> the sentiment of most, if not all, members of the Review Team >> (including me). > > Thank you for this approval. > >> My concern is not with the definitions per se, but rather how they >> might be used in other contexts. > > Current policies does not set up special rules for law enforcement as far as > I can see. > >> For example, are the "legitimate >> needs of law enforcement" constrained by Applicable Laws? > > Of course. That is the instrinctive nature of governmental executive bodies: > They are bound to the law. Private cooperations are also bound to the local > applicable law. Are you making a distinction between "Applicable Law", a defined term, and applicable law, an undefined term? If so, then we may be in agreement. Members of society, including corporate entities and law enforcement, are subject to applicable laws, any and all that apply. "Applicable law", undefined, is open to interpretation and subject to change. "Applicable Law", defined term, may have a more limited interpretation and may not be subject to change depending on how we choose to define it. > > But I misread your question. The term "applicable law" in our context deals > with the laws for the normal business processes in domain registration and > maintainence: The generation and maintainence of whois data. Your question > is about access to whois data. That's a different issue. If I understand your comment, we will have one definition of applicable laws for production, collection, processing, maintenance, etc., and another for use? If that's the case, what is that definition or are we leaving that open to interpretation as suggested above. Such a definition would need to support the policy as it currently stands which is for unrestricted, public access. > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From denise.michel at icann.org Wed Feb 16 23:27:38 2011 From: denise.michel at icann.org (Denise Michel) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:27:38 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff In-Reply-To: <8ED8BF55-5CD8-4678-A61E-0703E66B8C2A@etlaw.co.uk> References: <8ED8BF55-5CD8-4678-A61E-0703E66B8C2A@etlaw.co.uk> Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, I'm sorry I was inadvertently dropped from the last part of your conference call today. In case you need another copy of the draft list of questions for Staff that I sent you after the London meeting, it's attached. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Advisor to the President & CEO denise.michel at icann.org +1.408.429.3072 mobile +1.310.578.8632 direct ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Emily Taylor Date: Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff To: "rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS" Dear all Denise has kindly reminded me that she's awaiting the team's response to her draft list of questions. Can we add this to Wednesday's agenda, and try to get the most important items identified as priorities, so that the staff can get started on addressing our requests. Best, Emily Begin forwarded message: *From: *Denise Michel *Date: *20 January 2011 16:42:29 GMT *To: *rt4-whois at icann.org *Subject: **[Rt4-whois] Team questions for ICANN staff* *Reply-To: *denise.michel at icann.org Dear Review Team members: Please see attached draft list of questions from the WRT to ICANN staff. This list needs to be finalized by the WRT and, if possible, prioritized. Also, please note that several potential questions require clarification. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Advisor to the President denise.michel at icann.org +1.408.429.3072 mobile +1.310.578.8632 direct _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois [image: Emily Taylor Consultant (Internet Law and Governance)] 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: * 01865 582 811* mobile: * 07540 049 322* emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/dcfe631f/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DRAFT LIST OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FROM THE WHOIS REVIEW\ TEAM.doc Type: application/msword Size: 56832 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/dcfe631f/TEAM.doc From jbladel at godaddy.com Thu Feb 17 04:59:26 2011 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 21:59:26 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff Message-ID: <20110216215926.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.320a8c0a27.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110216/70cbd78a/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Thu Feb 17 08:07:15 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 08:07:15 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff In-Reply-To: References: <8ED8BF55-5CD8-4678-A61E-0703E66B8C2A@etlaw.co.uk> Message-ID: <47365174-24F0-4228-8A69-566A6CB07A31@etlaw.co.uk> Thanks Denise The team undertook to give any final comments on your questions by Friday and request staff to process the questions at that point. Team members : please note that the staff asked for clarification on a number of questions particularly towards the end. Please could we provide clarification or failing that drop those questions for this time. If anyone wants to add to the list of questions please do so. Kind regards Emily Sent from my iPhone On 16 Feb 2011, at 23:27, Denise Michel wrote: > Dear Review Team Members, > > I'm sorry I was inadvertently dropped from the last part of your conference call today. > > In case you need another copy of the draft list of questions for Staff that I sent you after the London meeting, it's attached. > > Regards, > Denise > > Denise Michel > ICANN > Advisor to the President & CEO > denise.michel at icann.org > +1.408.429.3072 mobile > +1.310.578.8632 direct > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Emily Taylor > Date: Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM > Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff > To: "rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS" > > > Dear all > > Denise has kindly reminded me that she's awaiting the team's response to her draft list of questions. Can we add this to Wednesday's agenda, and try to get the most important items identified as priorities, so that the staff can get started on addressing our requests. > > Best, > > Emily > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Denise Michel >> Date: 20 January 2011 16:42:29 GMT >> To: rt4-whois at icann.org >> Subject: [Rt4-whois] Team questions for ICANN staff >> Reply-To: denise.michel at icann.org >> >> Dear Review Team members: >> >> Please see attached draft list of questions from the WRT to ICANN >> staff. This list needs to be finalized by the WRT and, if possible, >> prioritized. Also, please note that several potential questions >> require clarification. >> >> Regards, >> Denise >> >> Denise Michel >> ICANN >> Advisor to the President >> denise.michel at icann.org >> +1.408.429.3072 mobile >> +1.310.578.8632 direct > >> _______________________________________________ >> Rt4-whois mailing list >> Rt4-whois at icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK > telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 > emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110217/3be2f464/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Fri Feb 18 07:27:33 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 07:27:33 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: [ccnso-members] Technical evolution of the WHOIS References: Message-ID: <62BC6D15-44D2-4D1A-99D5-0A20B70809CE@etlaw.co.uk> Dear all Chris Disspain, Chair of the ccNSO, has forwarded this message from the Chief Executive of the New Zealand registry, which discusses the evolution of the technical WHOIS protocol, and provides a summary and links which may be of interest to our Team's work. Kind regards Emily Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Jay Daley >> Date: 18 February 2011 10:24:40 AEDT >> To: ccNSO Members , "ccTLDcommunity at cctld-managers.org" >> Subject: [ccnso-members] Technical evolution of the WHOIS >> >> >> G'day >> >> At the Catagena ICANN meeting there was a workshop entitled "Technical evolution of the WHOIS" that I accidentally found myself attending. It began with some presentations from IANA staff and an ICANN director on what was wrong with the WHOIS and how that could be solved by moving to a new service, which would be fundamentally different from WHOIS. >> >> A number of issues were raised with this initiative, beginning with the fact that WHOIS is very popular, serves a useful purpose, has a great deal invested in it by registries, registrars and third parties and no case has been made that it should be replaced. Similarly no case has been made for the proposed new features they wanted to add to a replacement for WHOIS and the last time this was tried, with IRIS, there was little interest. >> >> There were also expressions of concern at the process for something as major as recommending the replacement of WHOIS with another protocol, which should not be a workshop with a few technical presentations and little publicity as the impact is far wider than this. It really is not a technical issue and calling this initiative the 'Technical evolution of WHOIS" seems to be way of introducing a major change by the backdoor. >> >> The resulting discussion was inconclusive and afterwards ICANN published some reports and set up a wiki with all the relevant documents: >> >> https://community.icann.org/display/TEwhoisService/ >> >> and a low traffic mailing list (tech-whois at icann.org) to facilitate ongoing discussion: >> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/tech-whois >> >> We in .nz have written a detailed submission to ICANN in response to this initiative, which raises our issues with both the substance of the ICANN reports and the process: >> >> http://internetnz.net.nz/system/files/submissions/internetnz_submission_on_technical_evolution_of_whois.pdf >> >> Another workshop is being planned for San Francisco with agenda still under discussion on the mailing list. The current proposal is that a cross-constituency working group consider a new service to provide the functionality that WHOIS does not have and see what support that has before any discussions on replacing WHOIS. If you are interested in this then please join the mailing list or come along to the next workshop. >> >> cheers >> Jay >> >> -- >> Jay Daley >> Chief Executive >> .nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited) >> desk: +64 4 931 6977 >> mobile: +64 21 678840 >> >> 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110218/df3b5a4b/attachment.html From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Fri Feb 18 19:02:38 2011 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:02:38 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff In-Reply-To: <47365174-24F0-4228-8A69-566A6CB07A31@etlaw.co.uk> References: <8ED8BF55-5CD8-4678-A61E-0703E66B8C2A@etlaw.co.uk> <47365174-24F0-4228-8A69-566A6CB07A31@etlaw.co.uk> Message-ID: <39BF0C2785E4044E81A4D55B333D510661C01095C7@DEN-MEXMS-001.corp.ebay.com> I?ve copied the relevant questions from the document below. It?s probably best to have the person that generated the question(s) answer the staff. 1) What does the eco-system of WHOIS look like from your point of view? *(Please elaborate on/clarify what is meant by this question) 2) What is the technical input that sustains the system? *(Please elaborate on/clarify what is meant by this question) 3) What is the economic system that sustains ? and maybe controls ? this system? *(Please elaborate on/clarify what is meant by this question) 4) Who or what are the predators (def.?)? *(Please elaborate on/clarify what is meant by this question) 5) Who or what are the ?parasites? and/or sources of risk for the stability of the system? *(Please elaborate on/clarify what is meant by this question) From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 12:07 AM To: denise.michel at icann.org Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff Thanks Denise The team undertook to give any final comments on your questions by Friday and request staff to process the questions at that point. Team members : please note that the staff asked for clarification on a number of questions particularly towards the end. Please could we provide clarification or failing that drop those questions for this time. If anyone wants to add to the list of questions please do so. Kind regards Emily Sent from my iPhone On 16 Feb 2011, at 23:27, Denise Michel > wrote: Dear Review Team Members, I'm sorry I was inadvertently dropped from the last part of your conference call today. In case you need another copy of the draft list of questions for Staff that I sent you after the London meeting, it's attached. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Advisor to the President & CEO denise.michel at icann.org +1.408.429.3072 mobile +1.310.578.8632 direct ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Emily Taylor > Date: Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Team questions for ICANN staff To: "rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS" > Dear all Denise has kindly reminded me that she's awaiting the team's response to her draft list of questions. Can we add this to Wednesday's agenda, and try to get the most important items identified as priorities, so that the staff can get started on addressing our requests. Best, Emily Begin forwarded message: From: Denise Michel > Date: 20 January 2011 16:42:29 GMT To: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: [Rt4-whois] Team questions for ICANN staff Reply-To: denise.michel at icann.org Dear Review Team members: Please see attached draft list of questions from the WRT to ICANN staff. This list needs to be finalized by the WRT and, if possible, prioritized. Also, please note that several potential questions require clarification. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Advisor to the President denise.michel at icann.org +1.408.429.3072 mobile +1.310.578.8632 direct _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois Error! Filename not specified. 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110218/8cff9453/attachment.html From sarmad at cantab.net Sat Feb 19 06:15:59 2011 From: sarmad at cantab.net (Dr. Sarmad Hussain) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 11:15:59 +0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] FW: Middle East Developments Cause Cancellation of ICANN Jordan Meeting Message-ID: <002a01cbcffc$7bd5aba0$738102e0$@net> Please note: http://blog.icann.org/2011/02/middle-east-developments-interfere-with-icann- 41-jordan-meeting/ This may have implications on our F2F meeting as well. regards, Sarmad -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/abe747e1/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Sat Feb 19 10:44:58 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Next week -availability and public comment materials Message-ID: Dear all Just to let you know, I will be off line from Monday afternoon UTC for the rest of the week on holiday and business, and will not have access to e-mails. I wanted to contribute to the cause of getting our materials out to public comment next week. As I see it, our situation is: Scope and roadmap - agreed Action plan and outreach plan - agreed Definitions and questions: Law enforcement - agreed Producers and maintainers - agreed (I think) Applicable laws - nearly there. We are waiting on additional questions to highlight concerns raised on the call by Bill. Bill is going to put his thoughts to the sub-Team, who will do the drafting. Consumers and consumer trust - This needs the most work, in my view. We have a definition of "consumer" which can go out. Again, Kathy raised some concerns on the call - and we agreed that Kathy will put her concerns in writing, and the sub-team will formulate some questions for public comment on that basis. We also need to think about how to capture the ideas on consumer trust. I have a suggestion, which I'd be glad to work on this weekend. That is, we develop a qualitative-type question set based on section two of the paper. The aim would be to capture views on what is important in promoting consumer trust. The other area that we have not addressed is the introduction to the public comment. Kathy and I would be glad to pull something together on this. I will let Kathy have a first draft this weekend. Let me know if I missed anything. Best, Emily 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/5c514410/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Sat Feb 19 12:46:41 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 12:46:41 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Message-ID: <026018D9-69EE-4E84-BBE7-1EAB120AE0D8@etlaw.co.uk> Dear all Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. Best wishes Emily 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/bc631199/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Consumer trust questions.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 104894 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/bc631199/Consumertrustquestions.docx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/bc631199/attachment-0001.html From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Sat Feb 19 17:31:05 2011 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:31:05 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Message-ID: <20110219103105.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.c0857a0c46.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/519e399a/attachment.html From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Sat Feb 19 21:03:03 2011 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 14:03:03 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Message-ID: <20110219140303.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.c31c6e0a3d.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/9b23102b/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Sat Feb 19 21:48:19 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 21:48:19 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" In-Reply-To: <20110219140303.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.c31c6e0a3d.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> References: <20110219140303.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.c31c6e0a3d.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> Message-ID: Dear Lynn Thank you very much for your comments. I like your revised definitions too. I think they fairly reflect the reasoning which you put forward on behalf of the subteam in our recent call. The reasoning will also help those who provide input to understand how we got to these definitions. Like you, I look forward to hearing from other members of the Team. Kind regards, and thanks again, Emily On 19 Feb 2011, at 21:03, wrote: > Hi Emily, > Many thanks for your work on this suggested questionnaire. I feel that these are all relevant and appropriate questions to include in a survey related to the goal of promoting consumer trust in the context of WHOIS data. > > My individual view is that I am quite happy to have this included in the material for public comment. But I do not speak for the entire sub-group and hope that they will share my perspective or propose revisions/edits to > what you have put forward. > > Best regards, > Lynn > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" > From: Emily Taylor > Date: Sat, February 19, 2011 7:46 am > To: "Dr.Sarmad Hussain" , Olivier ITEANU > , lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com, Peter Nettlefold > ;, Bill Smith ; > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS" > > Dear all > > Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. > > I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. > > Best wishes > > Emily > > > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK > telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 > emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk > > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/74b7fc3e/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Sun Feb 20 03:44:07 2011 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 20:44:07 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Message-ID: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110219/cf2b5ee0/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Sun Feb 20 09:39:38 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:39:38 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" In-Reply-To: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <19EA119A-BA0E-454D-A4FF-4FD326BE6550@etlaw.co.uk> Hi James No, I don't think it's just you. The points you raise are important, and I think that people in the community will expect us to use these terms with precision. So, please can I ask you to review the question set and make amendments following your suggestions below. Best, and thanks for raising these points. Emily On 20 Feb 2011, at 03:44, James M. Bladel wrote: > Emily et al: > > Perhaps it's just me, but I'm concerned that we are blurring some definitions (or I am over-thinking them). > > When I think "Consumer" in the context of WHOIS, two categories come to mind: > * The person or organization that has created a record, and submitted their contact details to WHOIS. In other efforts we have termed them PRODUCERS of WHOIS data; and, > * The person or organization that is querying the WHOIS system in search of further information about a domain name. To my knowledge, we are calling these folks "Consumers" when they are probably only part of that category. Recommend we call them END-USERS. > > The term "Consumer Trust" means, to me, that both PRODUCERS are confident that their personal data is being managed properly, -and- that the END-USERS are confident that the WHOIS system is returning accurate results. > > Not really requesting any actions or changes to the language, but wanted to propose a discussion about these two distinct types of "Consumers." If this subject has already been beaten to death in another forum, please forgive my oversight. > > THanks-- > > J. > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer > trust" > From: Emily Taylor > Date: Sat, February 19, 2011 6:46 am > To: "Dr.Sarmad Hussain" , Olivier ITEANU > , lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com, Peter > Nettlefold ;, Bill Smith > ; > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS" > > Dear all > > Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. > > I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. > > Best wishes > > Emily > > > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK > telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 > emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110220/5dddfc6a/attachment.html From kKleiman at pir.org Sun Feb 20 13:54:35 2011 From: kKleiman at pir.org (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 08:54:35 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" In-Reply-To: <026018D9-69EE-4E84-BBE7-1EAB120AE0D8@etlaw.co.uk> References: <026018D9-69EE-4E84-BBE7-1EAB120AE0D8@etlaw.co.uk> Message-ID: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760587095682@pir-mail-01> Hi All, Tx for all the work on the proposed questionnaire. Is this going out as part of our public comment period, as well as by additional distribution paths (e.g., our individual networks, websites, etc?)? I think there may be a updated version but, with apologies, I could not find it. So let me share the following thoughts on the attached version: 1. Emily's edits and questions make sense to me. 2. I think we should clarify that this involves gTLD data and gTLD registrations (as ccTLDs may differ) 3. Could we define all acronyms? E.g., ICT in question 18. (Acronyms and their meanings differ around the world). 4. I think we should identify ourselves, the source of the survey, how it will be used, where to provide the answers, deadlines, etc, on the form. 5. Do we want responders to identify themselves, or at least some general category from which they hail? If so, I know we have our own privacy/data protection issues to wrestle with. Perhaps some general categories if full identification is not requested (e.g., registrant... ). Really interesting work, and I truly look forward to seeing the results. Tx Consumer Trust Subteam!! Kathy From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 7:47 AM To: Dr.Sarmad Hussain; Olivier ITEANU; lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com; Peter Nettlefold; Bill Smith Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Dear all Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. Best wishes Emily -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110220/8285c3e3/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Consumer trust questions.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 41253 bytes Desc: Consumer trust questions.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110220/8285c3e3/Consumertrustquestions.docx From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Sun Feb 20 13:59:11 2011 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:59:11 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" In-Reply-To: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760587095682@pir-mail-01> References: <026018D9-69EE-4E84-BBE7-1EAB120AE0D8@etlaw.co.uk> <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760587095682@pir-mail-01> Message-ID: Hi Kathy Thanks - good points. I saw this as going out as part of the public comment, and see no reason why we should not also distribute proactively through our networks. Agree with all of Kathy's other suggestions. Best, Emily On 20 Feb 2011, at 13:54, Kathy Kleiman wrote: > Hi All, > Tx for all the work on the proposed questionnaire. Is this going out as part of our public comment period, as well as by additional distribution paths (e.g., our individual networks, websites, etc?)? > > I think there may be a updated version but, with apologies, I could not find it. So let me share the following thoughts on the attached version: > 1. Emily?s edits and questions make sense to me. > 2. I think we should clarify that this involves gTLD data and gTLD registrations (as ccTLDs may differ) > 3. Could we define all acronyms? E.g., ICT in question 18. (Acronyms and their meanings differ around the world). > 4. I think we should identify ourselves, the source of the survey, how it will be used, where to provide the answers, deadlines, etc, on the form. > 5. Do we want responders to identify themselves, or at least some general category from which they hail? If so, I know we have our own privacy/data protection issues to wrestle with. Perhaps some general categories if full identification is not requested (e.g., registrant? ). > > Really interesting work, and I truly look forward to seeing the results. > Tx Consumer Trust Subteam!! > Kathy > > From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor > Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 7:47 AM > To: Dr.Sarmad Hussain; Olivier ITEANU; lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com; Peter Nettlefold; Bill Smith > Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS > Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" > > Dear all > > Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. > > I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. > > Best wishes > > Emily > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110220/95210fab/attachment.html From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Sun Feb 20 14:09:40 2011 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 14:09:40 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumertrust" In-Reply-To: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <1454840456-1298211247-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-672352664-@bda297.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Hi James, The subgroup on consumer trust has a revised definition in work that we will distribute to the whole group shortly. Your suggested term of end user makes sense to me but the term used in the AOC is consumer. That is why we want to establish a common understanding of consumer and consumer trust. Please stand by for a further update on these definitions. Kind regards, Lynn Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: "James M. Bladel" Sender: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 20:44:07 To: Emily Taylor Cc: RT4 WHOIS Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From kKleiman at pir.org Sun Feb 20 14:15:45 2011 From: kKleiman at pir.org (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:15:45 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested defintion for "promotes consumer trust" In-Reply-To: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760587095684@pir-mail-01> Hi All, Tx for bearing with me on our call on Wednesday. I think we are coming close, but something still seems too broad. So let me try again ? with great thanks to the work of the Consumer Trust Subteam: Current Working Definition of Consumer by Consumer Trust Subteam: Individuals/organizations who are providing/maintaining/utilizing WHOIS data for commercial/non-commercial purposes. 1. I don?t think the gTLD organizations/companies (registrars, registries) who maintain the Whois data are consumers ? their use is business-to-business and governed by ICANN contract, so I would recommend we take them out of the definition. 2. At that point ?providing the data? has a little ambiguity as there will be the registrants who provide the data, and the companies that make it public. 3. I think the differentiation that James has set out below resolves the ambiguities I see. If everyone agrees, would it be possible to set these out as two definitions of consumer out separately? Best and tx, Kathy From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 10:44 PM To: Emily Taylor Cc: RT4 WHOIS Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Emily et al: Perhaps it's just me, but I'm concerned that we are blurring some definitions (or I am over-thinking them). When I think "Consumer" in the context of WHOIS, two categories come to mind: * The person or organization that has created a record, and submitted their contact details to WHOIS. In other efforts we have termed them PRODUCERS of WHOIS data; and, * The person or organization that is querying the WHOIS system in search of further information about a domain name. To my knowledge, we are calling these folks "Consumers" when they are probably only part of that category. Recommend we call them END-USERS. The term "Consumer Trust" means, to me, that both PRODUCERS are confident that their personal data is being managed properly, -and- that the END-USERS are confident that the WHOIS system is returning accurate results. Not really requesting any actions or changes to the language, but wanted to propose a discussion about these two distinct types of "Consumers." If this subject has already been beaten to death in another forum, please forgive my oversight. THanks-- J. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" From: Emily Taylor > Date: Sat, February 19, 2011 6:46 am To: "Dr.Sarmad Hussain" , Olivier ITEANU >, lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com, Peter Nettlefold ;, Bill Smith ; Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS" > Dear all Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. Best wishes Emily 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110220/e1a0e402/attachment.html From kKleiman at pir.org Sun Feb 20 14:20:18 2011 From: kKleiman at pir.org (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:20:18 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumertrust" In-Reply-To: <1454840456-1298211247-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-672352664-@bda297.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> References: <20110219204407.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dfd5bfd1c1.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> <1454840456-1298211247-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-672352664-@bda297.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Message-ID: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760587095685@pir-mail-01> Hi Lynn, Messages crossing in the ether. Tx again to you and the CT group for taking our discussions and suggestions under consideration. We appreciate it! Kathy -----Original Message----- From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 9:10 AM To: James M. Bladel; rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org; Emily Taylor Cc: RT4 WHOIS Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumertrust" Hi James, The subgroup on consumer trust has a revised definition in work that we will distribute to the whole group shortly. Your suggested term of end user makes sense to me but the term used in the AOC is consumer. That is why we want to establish a common understanding of consumer and consumer trust. Please stand by for a further update on these definitions. Kind regards, Lynn Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: "James M. Bladel" Sender: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 20:44:07 To: Emily Taylor Cc: RT4 WHOIS Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Sun Feb 20 17:05:13 2011 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:05:13 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" In-Reply-To: References: <026018D9-69EE-4E84-BBE7-1EAB120AE0D8@etlaw.co.uk> <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B752760587095682@pir-mail-01> Message-ID: I feel strongly that we should not collect PII. Too many issues with that. On Feb 20, 2011, at 5:59 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: Hi Kathy Thanks - good points. I saw this as going out as part of the public comment, and see no reason why we should not also distribute proactively through our networks. Agree with all of Kathy's other suggestions. Best, Emily On 20 Feb 2011, at 13:54, Kathy Kleiman wrote: Hi All, Tx for all the work on the proposed questionnaire. Is this going out as part of our public comment period, as well as by additional distribution paths (e.g., our individual networks, websites, etc?)? I think there may be a updated version but, with apologies, I could not find it. So let me share the following thoughts on the attached version: 1. Emily?s edits and questions make sense to me. 2. I think we should clarify that this involves gTLD data and gTLD registrations (as ccTLDs may differ) 3. Could we define all acronyms? E.g., ICT in question 18. (Acronyms and their meanings differ around the world). 4. I think we should identify ourselves, the source of the survey, how it will be used, where to provide the answers, deadlines, etc, on the form. 5. Do we want responders to identify themselves, or at least some general category from which they hail? If so, I know we have our own privacy/data protection issues to wrestle with. Perhaps some general categories if full identification is not requested (e.g., registrant? ). Really interesting work, and I truly look forward to seeing the results. Tx Consumer Trust Subteam!! Kathy From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 7:47 AM To: Dr.Sarmad Hussain; Olivier ITEANU; lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com; Peter Nettlefold; Bill Smith Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Dear all Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. Best wishes Emily [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/logo310.gif] 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk