From seth.reiss at lex-ip.com  Mon Sep 26 00:08:45 2011
From: seth.reiss at lex-ip.com (Seth M Reiss)
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 14:08:45 -1000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on
	questionnaire	for	consumer trust survey
In-Reply-To: <004201cc7bdc$789b3180$69d19480$@reiss@lex-ip.com>
References: <20110924194339.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.cdb28a55d4.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>	<F0416A5B-B911-4ED0-9668-DDB8A420F95A@vonarx.ca>
	<004201cc7bdc$789b3180$69d19480$@reiss@lex-ip.com>
Message-ID: <005301cc7be0$75ec4150$61c4c3f0$@reiss@lex-ip.com>

Maybe Internic Whois plus Kayak.com (travel site)

 

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Seth M Reiss
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2011 1:40 PM
To: 'Kim G. von Arx'; lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org; 'Jonathan Yardley'
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for consumer trust survey

 

I also like the survey in general but the selection of Whois site and domain name are interrelated. My feeling is that the survey should test how users react to dealing first with a ?thin? Whois because one issue we are to evaluate is the impact of having centralized ?thin? Whois services and decentralized ?thick? Whois services.

 

Internic seems to be a ?thin? Whois in respect to some domain names and a ?thick? Whois in respect to others.  It?s thin for Google.com, somewhat thin for the redcross.org, but thick for Wikipedia.org and UN.org.

 

Of course people do not distrust Google (at least in terms of not being locatable) so I am not sure that Google.com and Internic Whois is the right combination.

 

If we are going to give them a Whois web address, then I would prefer the users experience it ?thin? and have to figure out where to go from there.

 

On another note, I was giving a talk on legal entity names to a room of 150 company lawyers on Friday and asked for a show of hands who knew what Whois was?  Less than 10% responded affirmatively.  I expect that Whois awareness may be somewhat higher on the part of paralegals in the US since it is the paralegals who generally have the task of looking behind businesses.

 

Thanks Lynn, for all the good work.

 

Seth  

 

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kim G. von Arx
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 5:18 PM
To: <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org; Jonathan Yardley
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for consumer trust survey

 

Makes sense to me. 

 

In that regard I agree with your interNiC suggestion. 

 

Kim

Please excuse my typos!  This is sent from my iPhone. 


On 2011-09-24, at 22:43, <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com> wrote:

Thanks Kim,

We missed you in L.A. but understand.

Your suggestion of the United Nations or Red Cross are great!

Thanks for your time and thought in reviewing.

 

I am taking this feedback and Sharon's comments back to User Insight for

further consultation.

 

If anyone else has further comments or suggestions, please let me know tomorrow.

 

The predicament we have about which Whois page or site to use is that in the

qualitative interviews, it was clear that there is a very low awareness that there

is any kind of look-up or directory service for domain name owners.  And the name

"Whois" is certainly not well known.  We can expect that almost all the online survey recipients

will not be familiar with the term "Whois".

 

Just my impression was that the in person interviews showed that when people were

asked to research a website, they used several different methods and did not always

find a Whois page.

 

In this next step of research, the challenge is that this will be an online survey and

people have to have pretty specific direction and choices.   So we do want them to "find"

a Whois page.

 

Best regards,

Lynn

 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for
consumer trust survey
From: kim at vonarx.ca
Date: Sat, September 24, 2011 9:51 pm
To: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org, "Jonathan Yardley" <jyardley at userinsight.com>

Dear Lynn et al:

Thank you very much for all the hard work.

I think the questionnaire is very good. I was quite impressed by the
simplicity and insight it conveyed.

With respect to the WHOIS service they should be using, I suggest that
should be open, i.e, the user should try to find one for themselves. 
Having said that, I am not sure how much or what kind of beneficial data
that would add, but I think it may be a point worth raising.

With respect to the Internet site, I would suggest we go with the United
Nations website. I believe that all countries should be aware of the UN. 
Alternatively, how about the Red Cross?

Finally, with respect to the questions themselves. I think that there
should be something more in there with respect to concerns and or
questions those participants may have about the WHOIS service. Indeed,
there should be section for someone to does have domain name to look up
his/her own information and seeing what is out there about him/her and
then to have some information on what his/her thoughts are about that.

I believe the structure of the questions if well thought out and flows
quite nicely.

All in all, I believe this is well done. Thanks again for the hard work. 
I am very sorry that I did not make it to the LA meeting, but things are
crazy on my end here on the personal front and I am really barely keeping
my head above water.

All the best,

Kim


> <html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
> font-size:10pt;"><div>Dear All,</div>
> <div>I am forwarding below the preliminary questionnaire for the consumer
> trust survey, attached to this message.</div>
> <div>(The User Insight team is okay with this being distributed on the
> Whois email list.)</div>
> <div>I have copied Jonathan Yardley on this message as a courtesy.</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>We are working with a tight deadline and we need feedback this
> weekend.&nbsp; I know this is a dedicated</div>
> <div>team so appreciate your time in off business hours.</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>In particular, please see the last section of
> questions.&nbsp;&nbsp;As the last part of the survey,&nbsp;we would like
> for the participants to</div>
> <div>actually experience the Whois lookup.&nbsp; We need&nbsp;to decide
> on&nbsp;a website domain name to use for this purpose.</div>
> <div>Does anyone have a suggestion for a well known global website we
> could use in the survey?&nbsp; My sense is that</div>
> <div>Wikipedia would be recognized in Europe and North America but not
> sure if it would work everywhere.</div>
> <div>But it would be neutral in the sense that it is not a trading or
> commercial website.</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>Another question is which Whois lookup page should we use?</div>
> <div>My thought is to use the InterNIC one because it covers all current
> registries.&nbsp; Here is the link for reference:</div>
> <div>
> href="http://www.internic.net/whois.html">http://www.internic.net/whois.html <http://www.internic.net/whois.html%3c/div%3e> </div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>I am thinking&nbsp;that InterNIC&nbsp;is more "neutral" than trying
> to use the&nbsp;Whois page of&nbsp;one of the bigger registries or
> registrars.</div>
> <div>Kathy and James - as representatives of the registry and registrar
> constituency, would especially appreciate your</div>
> <div>suggestions on this point.&nbsp; Note that we would lose the point
> about domain ads being displayed if we decide to use InterNIC.</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>The alternative would be to choose 3 WHOIS lookup pages.&nbsp; The
> survey would have each participant look at 2 of them and</div>
> <div>the surveys would be distributed to obtain balanced results among
> those 3.&nbsp; I am just not sure how to pick 3.</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>Please note that all the questions will be translated to the primary
> language for each country.</div>
> <div>Also, there are some questions with specific examples that will be
> modified for appropriate examples in each country.</div>
> <div>The English questions here are using U.S. examples.</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>Sarmad, I will follow up with you separately on the point about
> non-Latin characters being unavailable in Whois lookups.</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>Please come back to me with any other questions.</div>
> <div>Best regards to all,</div>
> <div>Lynn</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <div>&nbsp;</div>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 8px;
> FONT-FAMILY: verdana; COLOR: black; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
> id=replyBlockquote webmail="1">
> <DIV id=wmQuoteWrapper>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject:
> Version 2<BR>From: Jonathan Yardley &lt;
> href="mailto:jyardley at userinsight.com">jyardley at userinsight.com&gt;<BR>Date:
> Fri, September 23, 2011 2:32 pm<BR>To: 
> href="mailto:lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com">lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com,
> jmorgan at userinsight.com,
> Rachel<BR>Walsh &lt;
> href="mailto:rwalsh at userinsight.com">rwalsh at userinsight.com&gt;<BR><BR>Hi
> Lynn,<BR>Here is V2. Please socialize with your team. In particular we
> would like help with selecting a universal URL for people to search for
> the owner of.<BR>Thanks-JCY<BR><BR><BR>Jonathan Yardley<BR>Director,
> Project Management<BR>
> href="mailto:jyardley at userinsight.com">jyardley at userinsight.com<BR><BR>UserInsight<BR>T
> 770 391 1099 ext. 1401<BR>C 404 542 8594<BR>Ui Blog | @UserInsight | AIM:
> jonyard<BR><BR>An Inc. 5000 Fastest Growing Company - 2008, 2009 &amp;
> 2010<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></span></body></html>_______________________________________________
> 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/20110925/095d16c2/attachment.html 

From kathy at kathykleiman.com  Mon Sep 26 02:26:42 2011
From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman)
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 22:26:42 -0400
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for
 consumer trust survey
In-Reply-To: <a866c8e32fc45835503f5f024594d79f.squirrel@vonarx.ca>
References: <20110923142211.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.7104158e4a.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
	<a866c8e32fc45835503f5f024594d79f.squirrel@vonarx.ca>
Message-ID: <4E7FE2E2.9070205@kathykleiman.com>

Kim wrote below:
<<Indeed,
there should be section for someone to does have domain name to look up
his/her own information and seeing what is out there about him/her and
then to have some information on what his/her thoughts are about that.>>

Lynn, thank you again (and again!) for a fascinating discussion and for so much work in this area. I want to support Kim's idea above of spending a little more time in the "my data" side of the questions. I think it is a great idea to have people look up their own domain name information in Whois and see what comes out. Is it the data they expect? Are they surprised or not? Even, is the data accurate for what they remember entering?

Tying it to an actual Whois search I think would be very useful and information.

Second to Seth also on thick and thin Whois databases. It will be very interesting to see the navigational issues.

Best and tx,
Kathy

:
> Dear Lynn et al:
>
> Thank you very much for all the hard work.
>
> I think the questionnaire is very good. I was quite impressed by the
> simplicity and insight it conveyed.
>
> With respect to the WHOIS service they should be using, I suggest that
> should be open, i.e, the user should try to find one for themselves.
> Having said that, I am not sure how much or what kind of beneficial data
> that would add, but I think it may be a point worth raising.
>
> With respect to the Internet site, I would suggest we go with the United
> Nations website.  I believe that all countries should be aware of the UN.
> Alternatively, how about the Red Cross?
>
> Finally, with respect to the questions themselves.  I think that there
> should be something more in there with respect to concerns and or
> questions those participants may have about the WHOIS service.  Indeed,
> there should be section for someone to does have domain name to look up
> his/her own information and seeing what is out there about him/her and
> then to have some information on what his/her thoughts are about that.
>
> I believe the structure of the questions if well thought out and flows
> quite nicely.
>
> All in all, I believe this is well done.  Thanks again for the hard work.
> I am very sorry that I did not make it to the LA meeting, but things are
> crazy on my end here on the personal front and I am really barely keeping
> my head above water.
>
> All the best,
>
> Kim
>
>
>> <html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
>> font-size:10pt;"><div>Dear All,</div>
>> <div>I am forwarding below the preliminary questionnaire for the consumer
>> trust survey, attached to this message.</div>
>> <div>(The User Insight team is okay with this being distributed on the
>> Whois email list.)</div>
>> <div>I have copied Jonathan Yardley on this message as a courtesy.</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>We are working with a tight deadline and we need feedback this
>> weekend.&nbsp; I know this is a dedicated</div>
>> <div>team so appreciate your time in off business hours.</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>In particular, please see the last section of
>> questions.&nbsp;&nbsp;As the last part of the survey,&nbsp;we would like
>> for the participants to</div>
>> <div>actually experience the Whois lookup.&nbsp; We need&nbsp;to decide
>> on&nbsp;a website domain name to use for this purpose.</div>
>> <div>Does anyone have a suggestion for a well known global website we
>> could use in the survey?&nbsp; My sense is that</div>
>> <div>Wikipedia would be recognized in Europe and North America but not
>> sure if it would work everywhere.</div>
>> <div>But it would be neutral in the sense that it is not a trading or
>> commercial website.</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>Another question is which Whois lookup page should we use?</div>
>> <div>My thought is to use the InterNIC one because it covers all current
>> registries.&nbsp; Here is the link for reference:</div>
>> <div><A
>> href="http://www.internic.net/whois.html">http://www.internic.net/whois.html</A></div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>I am thinking&nbsp;that InterNIC&nbsp;is more "neutral" than trying
>> to use the&nbsp;Whois page of&nbsp;one of the bigger registries or
>> registrars.</div>
>> <div>Kathy and James - as representatives of the registry and registrar
>> constituency, would especially appreciate your</div>
>> <div>suggestions on this point.&nbsp; Note that we would lose the point
>> about domain ads being displayed if we decide to use InterNIC.</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>The alternative would be to choose 3 WHOIS lookup pages.&nbsp; The
>> survey would have each participant look at 2 of them and</div>
>> <div>the surveys would be distributed to obtain balanced results among
>> those 3.&nbsp; I am just not sure how to pick 3.</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>Please note that all the questions will be translated to the primary
>> language for each country.</div>
>> <div>Also, there are some questions with specific examples that will be
>> modified for appropriate examples in each country.</div>
>> <div>The English questions here are using U.S. examples.</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>Sarmad, I will follow up with you separately on the point about
>> non-Latin characters being unavailable in Whois lookups.</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>Please come back to me with any other questions.</div>
>> <div>Best regards to all,</div>
>> <div>Lynn</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <div>&nbsp;</div>
>> <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 8px;
>> FONT-FAMILY: verdana; COLOR: black; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
>> id=replyBlockquote webmail="1">
>> <DIV id=wmQuoteWrapper>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject:
>> Version 2<BR>From: Jonathan Yardley&lt;<a
>> href="mailto:jyardley at userinsight.com">jyardley at userinsight.com</a>&gt;<BR>Date:
>> Fri, September 23, 2011 2:32 pm<BR>To:<a
>> href="mailto:lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com">lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com</a>,
>> <a href="mailto:jmorgan at userinsight.com">jmorgan at userinsight.com</a>,
>> Rachel<BR>Walsh&lt;<a
>> href="mailto:rwalsh at userinsight.com">rwalsh at userinsight.com</a>&gt;<BR><BR>Hi
>> Lynn,<BR>Here is V2. Please socialize with your team. In particular we
>> would like help with selecting a universal URL for people to search for
>> the owner of.<BR>Thanks-JCY<BR><BR><BR>Jonathan Yardley<BR>Director,
>> Project Management<BR><a
>> href="mailto:jyardley at userinsight.com">jyardley at userinsight.com</a><BR><BR>UserInsight<BR>T
>> 770 391 1099 ext. 1401<BR>C 404 542 8594<BR>Ui Blog | @UserInsight | AIM:
>> jonyard<BR><BR>An Inc. 5000 Fastest Growing Company - 2008, 2009&amp;
>> 2010<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></span></body></html>_______________________________________________
>> 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 sharon.lemon at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk  Mon Sep 26 10:16:30 2011
From: sharon.lemon at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk (LEMON, Sharon)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:16:30 +0100
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Whois photos
Message-ID: <3062FB662B110E4A9F14C63284D07FF7050C6757A904@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk>

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

Dear All,

It was great to see you all last week and I have attached the photos I took during our night out.  You will probably appreciate why I went into law enforcement rather than photography.

I went on to LA after out meeting with my family and stayed at a fabulous hotel, the London West Hollywood. I would recommend it if you ever stayed there, bit pricey but you do get to meet Mike Tyson in the foyer.

I hope it goes well in Dakar, I will join by telecon.

Best Wishes

Sharon



Sharon LEMON OBE
Deputy Director
Cyber and Forensics
Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA)
07768 290902
0207 855 2800

This information is supplied in confidence by SOCA, and is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It may also be subject to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, for example, under the Data Protection Act 1998. Requests for disclosure to the public must be referred to the SOCA FOI single point of contact, by email on PICUEnquiries at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk or by telephoning 0870 268 8677.

All E-Mail sent and received by SOCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by SOCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring.  E-Mail may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within SOCA, on authority from the Director General or his Deputy for analysis. This E-Mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible.


The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020510.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 177871 bytes
Desc: P1020510.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020510.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020511.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 163557 bytes
Desc: P1020511.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020511.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020512.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 178685 bytes
Desc: P1020512.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020512.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020513.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 166449 bytes
Desc: P1020513.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020513.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020514.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 164935 bytes
Desc: P1020514.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020514.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020515.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 164361 bytes
Desc: P1020515.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020515.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020516.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 164627 bytes
Desc: P1020516.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020516.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020518.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 172276 bytes
Desc: P1020518.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020518.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020517.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 176754 bytes
Desc: P1020517.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020517.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020519.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 177640 bytes
Desc: P1020519.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020519.JPG 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: P1020520.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 172993 bytes
Desc: P1020520.JPG
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/820411fd/P1020520.JPG 

From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Mon Sep 26 16:12:33 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:12:33 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for
 consumer trust survey
Message-ID: <20110926091233.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.4ef13876d9.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/0fb52e07/attachment.html 

From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Mon Sep 26 16:13:55 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:13:55 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for
 consumer trust survey
Message-ID: <20110926091355.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.4c14109e5f.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/8c597019/attachment.html 

From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Mon Sep 26 16:15:36 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:15:36 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for
 consumer trust survey
Message-ID: <20110926091536.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.14537cf09e.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/e7f5594e/attachment.html 

From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Mon Sep 26 16:18:27 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:18:27 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Requesting team feedback on questionnaire for
 consumer trust survey
Message-ID: <20110926091827.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.e1b6a5459d.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/830a8a8d/attachment.html 

From denise.michel at icann.org  Mon Sep 26 17:10:05 2011
From: denise.michel at icann.org (Denise Michel)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:10:05 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Additional requests for informaiton?
Message-ID: <CAPcHvQGTtQG1ro8Dy9zXQo2s0oGN+HAzpCkEYkubCbnuopDeDA@mail.gmail.com>

Hello.

Is there any additional information arising out of last week's meeting that
the Team needs from ICANN Staff (beyond what I sent during the meeting)?

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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110926/09215834/attachment.html 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Tue Sep 27 08:56:38 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 01:56:38 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Reimbursement - Marina del Rey trip
Message-ID: <CAA75C66.F8AB%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

Please be kindly reminded that the reimbursement form and banking information form may be found on your public wiki at:
https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Travel+Support

Thanks,

Kindest regards

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110927/bbfd0466/attachment.html 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Tue Sep 27 11:10:16 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:10:16 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Conf call on Wed cancelled
Message-ID: <CAA77BB8.F935%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

This is to inform you that Emily and Kathy have decided to cancel the call scheduled for Wednesday, 28 September.

In line with your teleconference schedule https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/TeleConferences, your next conference call will be held on Wednesday, 12 October at 21:00 UTC.

Thanks,

Kindest regards

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110927/96a20443/attachment.html 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Tue Sep 27 13:03:04 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 06:03:04 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] List of Action Items - PLEASE REVIEW
Message-ID: <CAA79628.F9AB%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

Please find attached a list of the action items the Team agreed upon in Marina del Rey.

Please review the list and feel free to add any additional item Kathy and I could have inadvertently forgotten.

Note that this document (along with date + name information) is available on the wiki at https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Action+Items. As you will notice the wiki post is a more interactive version, e.g. features such as green tick when a task has been completed.

Thanks,

Kindest regards

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110927/fc607f57/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Action items - Marina del Rey - 27 Sept.doc
Type: application/x-msword
Size: 38400 bytes
Desc: Action items - Marina del Rey - 27 Sept.doc
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110927/fc607f57/Actionitems-MarinadelRey-27Sept.doc 

From omar at kaminski.adv.br  Tue Sep 27 13:43:50 2011
From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:43:50 -0300
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Conf call on Wed cancelled
In-Reply-To: <CAA77BB8.F935%alice.jansen@icann.org>
References: <CAA77BB8.F935%alice.jansen@icann.org>
Message-ID: <CAD48TT9BhwX-gL2M8qLN61rCgKv2FPJseoeyEiO2o9rPS1rC4g@mail.gmail.com>

Dear fellows, Oct 12 is a holiday here and I'll be out, I have a
travel scheduled. Sorry to miss that one.

Omar


2011/9/27 Alice Jansen <alice.jansen at icann.org>:
> Dear Review Team Members,
> This is to inform you that Emily and Kathy have decided to cancel the call
> scheduled for Wednesday, 28 September.
> In line with your teleconference
> schedule?https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/TeleConferences,
> your next conference call will be held on Wednesday, 12 October at 21:00
> UTC.
> Thanks,
> Kindest regards
> Alice
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
>
>



From omar at kaminski.adv.br  Tue Sep 27 14:47:13 2011
From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:47:13 -0300
Subject: [Rt4-whois] [OT] Civil Rights Framework for Internet in Brazil
Message-ID: <CAD48TT9WPYs_Vw9Ea5-u9vHKahij5N6EcUfX_nd=LsL2L=41jg@mail.gmail.com>

http://direitorio.fgv.br/node/1850

At last an english version, important to understand the core
discussion about cyberlaw in Brazil in the next years.

Regards,

Omar

PS: I've just heard on an online event streaming right now (Brazilian
Ecommerce Day) about an "Brazilian Dream" before the "American Dream"
:)


From denise.michel at icann.org  Tue Sep 27 15:55:28 2011
From: denise.michel at icann.org (Denise Michel)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:55:28 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Additional requests for informaiton?
In-Reply-To: <4E81BE9E.10802@CC.UniVie.ac.at>
References: <CAPcHvQGTtQG1ro8Dy9zXQo2s0oGN+HAzpCkEYkubCbnuopDeDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E81BE9E.10802@CC.UniVie.ac.at>
Message-ID: <CAPcHvQEzhbqEwvvOy-Zg7kYyXfvt5Fji=fA+wXLhqO84QGgF=A@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Wilfried,

ICANN Staff is working on these questions.

For the sake of completeness, here are the additional questions that were
not included in the Action List for Staff:

1.   How is the new gTLD program addressing Whois policy for IDNs?

2.   What agreements are in place that address Whois policy and
IDNs (including for registrars and registries)?

3.   What plans do ICANN Compliance Staff have to ensure Whois policy
compliance for IDNs?

4.   What technical standards are there to support Whois policy compliance
for IDNs (ie. data model, services).

5.   How is the application community working to make Whois available to end
users for IDNs (ie. display/web based access, etc.)


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


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 5:16 AM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet <
Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at> wrote:

> Hi Denise,
>
> just a short reminder regarding the IDN stuff mail I sent to you during
> the meeting, Subj: Fwd: Re: WHOIS RT: IDN thread
>
> Thanks,
> Wilfried.
>
> Denise Michel wrote:
>
> > Hello.
> >
> > Is there any additional information arising out of last week's meeting
> > that the Team needs from ICANN Staff (beyond what I sent during the
> > meeting)?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Denise
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110927/b9bf34a3/attachment.html 

From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Tue Sep 27 16:09:13 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:09:13 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Updated Questionnaire for Consumer Trust Survey - Final
	Review
Message-ID: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110927/17e6d6b6/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICANN%20Questionnaire%20V5[1].doc
Type: application/msword application
Size: 47104 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110927/17e6d6b6/ICANN20Questionnaire20V51.doc 

From kim at vonarx.ca  Tue Sep 27 16:39:34 2011
From: kim at vonarx.ca (Kim G. von Arx)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:39:34 -0400
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Updated Questionnaire for Consumer Trust Survey -
	Final Review
In-Reply-To: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
References: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <D510486D-0981-4EB6-8445-E40DB4278072@vonarx.ca>

I would suggest that we also have a section about what particular concern they may had about the Whois information available. In light of that, I think a personal website of an individual would be good. Indeed, we could just register a fake one, eg, Kelly Doe.com or something like that and and set it up as a personal family site. 

The reason for that is to convey that the information on the Whois does not make a distinction between corporate va natural persona etc. 

Other than that I think this is great. 

I am not sure about coca cola though although, granted coca cola has been for years the most recognized brand in the world. I still think the red cross is the best option and I was not aware that it was based on Christianity. Alternatively, we could use separate city domain names for each country, eg, Washington for the us, Ottawa for Canada, beijing for china, etc. 

Just my two cents. 

Kim

Please excuse my typos!  This is sent from my iPhone. 

On 2011-09-27, at 12:09, <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
> Many thanks for the feedback and engagement from several members of the team.
> It is much appreciated.
>  
> Attached is an updated copy of the English language consumer trust survey.
> Our deadline for any further revisions is noon tomorrow, GMT -5 time zone, September 28.
> In the interest of time, for comments and feedback, please copy in Jonathan Yardley from User Insight
> (included on this message).
>  
> Language interpreters will be translating the survey questions for the primary language in each
> of the countries we selected.  Along with that, particular examples in the questions will be
> reviewed for an appropriate equivalent in each country.
>  
> After further discussion with the User Insight team, the approach being taken for the Whois look up site is
> NOT to direct anyone to a specific WHOIS site or page.  As a result, we can expect that some participants will
> report that they were unable to find the domain registrant information.  At the same time, we will get a more
> realistic picture of the difficulty in finding domain registrant registration or people who think the registrar is the
> domain owner.
>  
> As a URL to use for the lookup, my suggestion is to use http://thecoca-colacompany.com
> After looking at all the other options, I feel this would not be offensive to anyone and it is a website
> for a globally distributed consumer product.  After testing on search engines, I also felt that websites such as Wikipedia or the UN can lead to confusing search results
> if the phrase "who owns xxxx" is used. 
>  
> There are some specific questions for those who do have their own domain names.  Other participants will
> skip over these.
>  
> We looked hard at the sequence of questions and considered the suggestion to move the Whois lookup bit closer to the
> beginning.  But we do have to gather some basic info about the participant at the start.  An effort has been made
> to keep the questions to just the essential ones and minimize the total length of the survey.
>  
> Finally, in China, one or two additional questions will be added about non-Latin characters.  The research team is
> checking to see if this would also be appropriate for India with Hindi.   This issue has prompted me to suggest that
> in our overall report, we should include information about the number of IDNs that are non-Latin and the current technical
> limitation (related to ASCII) on WHOIS records being available only in Latin character languages.
>  
> Again, thanks for the team support on this effort.
> Lynn
>  
>  
>  
> <ICANN%20Questionnaire%20V5[1].doc>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110927/54de3fe1/attachment.html 

From kathy at kathykleiman.com  Tue Sep 27 19:02:44 2011
From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 15:02:44 -0400
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Additional requests for informaiton?
In-Reply-To: <CAPcHvQEzhbqEwvvOy-Zg7kYyXfvt5Fji=fA+wXLhqO84QGgF=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPcHvQGTtQG1ro8Dy9zXQo2s0oGN+HAzpCkEYkubCbnuopDeDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E81BE9E.10802@CC.UniVie.ac.at>
	<CAPcHvQEzhbqEwvvOy-Zg7kYyXfvt5Fji=fA+wXLhqO84QGgF=A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E821DD4.4020406@kathykleiman.com>

Many thanks, Denise!
Kathy

:
> Dear Wilfried,
>
> ICANN Staff is working on these questions.
>
> For the sake of completeness, here are the additional questions that 
> were not included in the Action List for Staff:
>
>     1.   How is the new gTLD program addressing Whois policy for IDNs?
>
>     2.   What agreements are in place that address Whois policy and
>     IDNs (including for registrars and registries)?
>
>     3.   What plans do ICANN Compliance Staff have to ensure Whois
>     policy compliance for IDNs?
>
>     4.   What technical standards are there to support Whois policy
>     compliance for IDNs (ie. data model, services).
>
>     5.   How is the application community working to make Whois
>     available to end users for IDNs (ie. display/web based access, etc.)
>
>
> Regards,
> Denise
>
> Denise Michel
> ICANN
> Advisor to the President & CEO
> denise.michel at icann.org <mailto:denise.michel at icann.org>
> +1.408.429.3072 mobile
> +1.310.578.8632 direct
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 5:16 AM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 
> <Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at <mailto:Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Denise,
>
>     just a short reminder regarding the IDN stuff mail I sent to you
>     during
>     the meeting, Subj: Fwd: Re: WHOIS RT: IDN thread
>
>     Thanks,
>     Wilfried.
>
>     Denise Michel wrote:
>
>     > Hello.
>     >
>     > Is there any additional information arising out of last week's
>     meeting
>     > that the Team needs from ICANN Staff (beyond what I sent during the
>     > meeting)?
>     >
>     > Regards,
>     > Denise
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110927/53ef74cd/attachment.html 

From omar at kaminski.adv.br  Tue Sep 27 19:16:27 2011
From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:16:27 -0300
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Updated Questionnaire for Consumer Trust Survey -
 Final Review
In-Reply-To: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
References: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <CAD48TT9bpCWmJWTBo9uGpeuhNZAq4z+B+g7p1A8=UwxW7h-8oA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Lynn,

Very good work, I would suggest just a minor ajustments if necessary
for better balance. For example:

4-) "I do not use the Internet at all (TERMINATE)". Doesn't make
sense, since if she/he doesn't use at all won't be starting filling an
ICANN's survey :))

5-) Who isn't "somewhat" (intermediate) experienced should be
considered "extremely experienced"?

6-) "Surfing the web" is too general, it embraces all other options.
How about an option related to study and research (academic, scholar)
and perhaps something more political like "online activisms"?

9-) Collecting "any personal information" and having "financial
transaction features through your website" have the same weight for
survey purposes?

About Coca-Cola, I got the idea but could means trouble anyhow, but
maybe less than Apple, Microsoft and other power brands.

Best,
Omar


2011/9/27  <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>:
> Dear All,
> Many thanks for the feedback and engagement from several members of the
> team.
> It is much appreciated.
>
> Attached is an updated copy of the English language consumer trust survey.
> Our deadline for any further revisions is noon tomorrow, GMT -5 time zone,
> September 28.
> In the interest of time, for comments and feedback, please copy in Jonathan
> Yardley from User Insight
> (included on this message).
>
> Language interpreters will be translating the survey questions for the
> primary language in each
> of the countries we selected.? Along with that, particular examples in the
> questions will be
> reviewed for an appropriate equivalent in each country.
>
> After further discussion with the User Insight team, the approach being
> taken for the Whois look up site is
> NOT to direct anyone to a specific WHOIS site or page.? As?a result, we can
> expect that some participants will
> report that they were unable to find the domain registrant information.? At
> the same time, we will get a more
> realistic picture of the difficulty in finding domain registrant
> registration or people who think the registrar is the
> domain owner.
>
> As a URL to use for the lookup, my suggestion is to use
> http://thecoca-colacompany.com
> After looking at all the other options, I feel this would not be offensive
> to anyone and it is a website
> for a globally distributed?consumer product.? After testing on search
> engines,?I also felt that websites such as Wikipedia or the UN can lead to
> confusing search results
> if the phrase "who owns xxxx" is used.
>
> There are some specific questions for those who do?have their own domain
> names.? Other participants will
> skip over these.
>
> We looked hard at the sequence of questions and considered the?suggestion to
> move the Whois lookup bit closer?to the
> beginning.? But we do have to gather some basic info about the participant
> at the?start.? An effort has been made
> to keep the questions to just the essential ones and minimize the total
> length of the survey.
>
> Finally, in China, one or two additional questions will be added about
> non-Latin characters.? The research team is
> checking to see if this would also be appropriate for India with Hindi.
> This issue has prompted me to suggest that
> in our overall report, we should include information about the number of
> IDNs that are non-Latin and the current technical
> limitation (related to ASCII) on WHOIS records being available only in Latin
> character languages.
>
> Again, thanks for the team support on this effort.
> Lynn
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
>
>



From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at  Tue Sep 27 19:17:10 2011
From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:17:10 +0000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Updated Questionnaire for Consumer Trust Survey -
 Final Review
In-Reply-To: <D510486D-0981-4EB6-8445-E40DB4278072@vonarx.ca>
References: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
	<D510486D-0981-4EB6-8445-E40DB4278072@vonarx.ca>
Message-ID: <4E822136.7070008@CC.UniVie.ac.at>

Kim G. von Arx wrote:

> I would suggest that we also have a section about what particular concern they may had about the Whois information available. In light of that, I think a personal website of an individual would be good. Indeed, we could just register a fake one, eg, Kelly Doe.com or something like that and and set it up as a personal family site. 
> 
> The reason for that is to convey that the information on the Whois does not make a distinction between corporate va natural persona etc. 
> 
> Other than that I think this is great. 

I agree, in ?articular with regard to the specific issues of non-latin
environments like chinese or hindi. Arabic would be intersting as well,
I presume. The worst that can happen is that we do not learn additional
things :-)

> I am not sure about coca cola though although, granted coca cola has been for years the most recognized brand in the world. I still think the red cross is the best option and I was not aware that it was based on Christianity. Alternatively, we could use separate city domain names for each country, eg, Washington for the us, Ottawa for Canada, beijing for china, etc. 

Well, my "issue" with the Red Cross is that the "cross" incarnation is
linked to christianity, but presumably pretty well-known globally. I guess
the islamic eqivalent, the Red Halfmoon is comparably well-known in its
respective environment(s). As a faith-neutral version, there is also the
Red Diamond incarnation, but I think this one is almost unknown around the
world....

> Just my two cents. 
> 
> Kim

Thanks, Lynn and Jonathan, for a very professional approach and for keeping
us involved! Best regards,
Wilfried.

Please excuse my typos! I was using my clumsy fingers :-)

> Please excuse my typos!  This is sent from my iPhone. 
> 
> On 2011-09-27, at 12:09, <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Dear All,
>>Many thanks for the feedback and engagement from several members of the team.
>>It is much appreciated.
>> 
>>Attached is an updated copy of the English language consumer trust survey.
>>Our deadline for any further revisions is noon tomorrow, GMT -5 time zone, September 28.
>>In the interest of time, for comments and feedback, please copy in Jonathan Yardley from User Insight
>>(included on this message).
>> 
>>Language interpreters will be translating the survey questions for the primary language in each
>>of the countries we selected.  Along with that, particular examples in the questions will be
>>reviewed for an appropriate equivalent in each country.
>> 
>>After further discussion with the User Insight team, the approach being taken for the Whois look up site is
>>NOT to direct anyone to a specific WHOIS site or page.  As a result, we can expect that some participants will
>>report that they were unable to find the domain registrant information.  At the same time, we will get a more
>>realistic picture of the difficulty in finding domain registrant registration or people who think the registrar is the
>>domain owner.
>> 
>>As a URL to use for the lookup, my suggestion is to use http://thecoca-colacompany.com
>>After looking at all the other options, I feel this would not be offensive to anyone and it is a website
>>for a globally distributed consumer product.  After testing on search engines, I also felt that websites such as Wikipedia or the UN can lead to confusing search results
>>if the phrase "who owns xxxx" is used. 
>> 
>>There are some specific questions for those who do have their own domain names.  Other participants will
>>skip over these.
>> 
>>We looked hard at the sequence of questions and considered the suggestion to move the Whois lookup bit closer to the
>>beginning.  But we do have to gather some basic info about the participant at the start.  An effort has been made
>>to keep the questions to just the essential ones and minimize the total length of the survey.
>> 
>>Finally, in China, one or two additional questions will be added about non-Latin characters.  The research team is
>>checking to see if this would also be appropriate for India with Hindi.   This issue has prompted me to suggest that
>>in our overall report, we should include information about the number of IDNs that are non-Latin and the current technical
>>limitation (related to ASCII) on WHOIS records being available only in Latin character languages.
>> 
>>Again, thanks for the team support on this effort.
>>Lynn
>> 
>> 
>> 
>><ICANN%20Questionnaire%20V5[1].doc>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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 Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at  Tue Sep 27 19:27:05 2011
From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:27:05 +0000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] SSAC recommendations regarding terminology
Message-ID: <4E822389.7060602@CC.UniVie.ac.at>

Dear Tema Members,

whiole waiting for my flight back home to Europe on Friday, I had the
opportunity to consciously read the various documents, already having
the considerations of the F2F meeting in my (almost empty :-) ) head.

After doing so, I am wondering what the position of the team is wer the
recommendations of the SSAC, specifically to think about adopting their
proposals for terminology.

I think adopting the basic suggestions to clearly specify registration
data, protocol stuff and directory service/display for the end-user
does make a lot of sense.

I am less convinced that the more detailed and specific terminology
suggestions and acronyms would really benefit the readers of our final
report.

Does anyone have a particular pov or guidance?

Cheers,
Wilfried.


From kathy at kathykleiman.com  Wed Sep 28 02:48:26 2011
From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 22:48:26 -0400
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Updated Questionnaire for Consumer Trust Survey -
 Final Review
In-Reply-To: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
References: <20110927090913.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.f372ad8f0b.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <4E828AFA.3060009@kathykleiman.com>

Hi Lynn,
I echo everyone's thanks.  Quick question about questions 7 and 8 
(pasted below).  I found them confusing. In question #7, what is a 
website domain?  Domain names are used for email, listservs, websites, 
FTP sites and other purposes (and some are just parked pending future 
use).  As the question seems to be part of our "collection of personal 
data" series, can we ask generally whether they have personally 
registered a domain name, rather than linking it to a registration with 
a purpose? I think that will be more accessible...

Re: question #9, the list seems a little narrow.  Business use makes 
sense, personal use makes sense, but what about organizational use?  
Many individuals register for domain names in their own name for small 
political, hobby, parenting and religious organizations --- and place 
their own data in the Whois.

  A thought on "non-profit."  We looked at this term when designing the 
GNSO Council Whois studies and found it to be US-centric -- based in US 
tax law. The global term we found more understandable was
"noncommercial" -- e.g., many non-US based NGOs are not "non-profit" per 
se (as US legal category), but are certainly noncommercial.  But the 
more general question above about organizational use may be broader and 
more approachable -- as many organizations, especially those run by 
individuals, are not formally incorporated -- and definitely fall 
outside of both "business" and "personal" use.

Finally, is there a question of domain name registrant respondents 
asking them to search their own data in the Whois? If I missed it, 
apologies!  There is support for this type of question -- and it goes 
beyond the broad "do you know your information is provided" -- to the 
very specific "does your sense of what is available about you correspond 
to what you actually found?" I thought it very interesting that the one 
person who searched for his own domain name in the initial interviews 
was upset to find the information displayed was not what he thought it 
should be.

Sorry for such a long note -- I wanted to explain everything in the 
interest of time. In the end, I think it results in a few small changes 
to two questions, and a short additional one.

Best and great thanks,
Kathy
------------------------ Questions 7 and 8 below -------------------------

     7.    Do you own and maintain a website domain which you personally 
registered?

? Yes (Continue)

? No (Skip to Q10)


8.     Which of the following best describes the purpose of your website?

? It's for my Business

? It's for my Personal use

? It's for a non profit organization

:
> Dear All,
> Many thanks for the feedback and engagement from several members of 
> the team.
> It is much appreciated.
> Attached is an updated copy of the English language consumer trust survey.
> Our deadline for any further revisions is noon tomorrow, GMT -5 time 
> zone, September 28.
> In the interest of time, for comments and feedback, please copy in 
> Jonathan Yardley from User Insight
> (included on this message).
> Language interpreters will be translating the survey questions for the 
> primary language in each
> of the countries we selected.  Along with that, particular examples in 
> the questions will be
> reviewed for an appropriate equivalent in each country.
> After further discussion with the User Insight team, the approach 
> being taken for the Whois look up site is
> NOT to direct anyone to a specific WHOIS site or page.  As a result, 
> we can expect that some participants will
> report that they were unable to find the domain registrant 
> information.  At the same time, we will get a more
> realistic picture of the difficulty in finding domain registrant 
> registration or people who think the registrar is the
> domain owner.
> As a URL to use for the lookup, my suggestion is to use 
> http://thecoca-colacompany.com
> After looking at all the other options, I feel this would not be 
> offensive to anyone and it is a website
> for a globally distributed consumer product.  After testing on search 
> engines, I also felt that websites such as Wikipedia or the UN can 
> lead to confusing search results
> if the phrase "who owns xxxx" is used.
> There are some specific questions for those who do have their own 
> domain names.  Other participants will
> skip over these.
> We looked hard at the sequence of questions and considered 
> the suggestion to move the Whois lookup bit closer to the
> beginning.  But we do have to gather some basic info about the 
> participant at the start.  An effort has been made
> to keep the questions to just the essential ones and minimize the 
> total length of the survey.
> Finally, in China, one or two additional questions will be added about 
> non-Latin characters.  The research team is
> checking to see if this would also be appropriate for India with 
> Hindi.   This issue has prompted me to suggest that
> in our overall report, we should include information about the number 
> of IDNs that are non-Latin and the current technical
> limitation (related to ASCII) on WHOIS records being available only in 
> Latin character languages.
> Again, thanks for the team support on this effort.
> Lynn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110927/0a8d4852/attachment.html 

From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com  Wed Sep 28 05:45:03 2011
From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:45:03 -0600
Subject: [Rt4-whois] SSAC recommendations regarding terminology
In-Reply-To: <4E822389.7060602@CC.UniVie.ac.at>
References: <4E822389.7060602@CC.UniVie.ac.at>
Message-ID: <EA3AB236-951E-47E5-9082-E02C2AF10780@paypal.com>

I support adopting the suggestions re clearly defining data, protocol, etc.

On Sep 27, 2011, at 10:27 PM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:

> Dear Tema Members,
> 
> whiole waiting for my flight back home to Europe on Friday, I had the
> opportunity to consciously read the various documents, already having
> the considerations of the F2F meeting in my (almost empty :-) ) head.
> 
> After doing so, I am wondering what the position of the team is wer the
> recommendations of the SSAC, specifically to think about adopting their
> proposals for terminology.
> 
> I think adopting the basic suggestions to clearly specify registration
> data, protocol stuff and directory service/display for the end-user
> does make a lot of sense.
> 
> I am less convinced that the more detailed and specific terminology
> suggestions and acronyms would really benefit the readers of our final
> report.
> 
> Does anyone have a particular pov or guidance?
> 
> Cheers,
> Wilfried.
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois




From emily at emilytaylor.eu  Wed Sep 28 06:19:35 2011
From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor)
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:19:35 +0100
Subject: [Rt4-whois] SSAC recommendations regarding terminology
In-Reply-To: <EA3AB236-951E-47E5-9082-E02C2AF10780@paypal.com>
References: <4E822389.7060602@CC.UniVie.ac.at>
	<EA3AB236-951E-47E5-9082-E02C2AF10780@paypal.com>
Message-ID: <CAKWYFscCvmJJ1Ze2Gk80=qBJQ=Er4DHpL18Hn+fbFNXeaH8b3A@mail.gmail.com>

Hi guys

Thanks for absorbing the SSAC document.  SSAC have made a conscious effort
to include us in their draft-report loop in order to help us with our work,
which is very good of them.

For the benefit of members of the team who may be sinking under the load of
documents to be read, would you mind reproducing the terms that you think we
should adopt (in the body of an e-mail), and any _brief_ reasoning which
might assist comprehension.

Much appreciated,

Emily

On 28 September 2011 06:45, Smith, Bill <bill.smith at paypal-inc.com> wrote:

> I support adopting the suggestions re clearly defining data, protocol, etc.
>
> On Sep 27, 2011, at 10:27 PM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
>
> > Dear Tema Members,
> >
> > whiole waiting for my flight back home to Europe on Friday, I had the
> > opportunity to consciously read the various documents, already having
> > the considerations of the F2F meeting in my (almost empty :-) ) head.
> >
> > After doing so, I am wondering what the position of the team is wer the
> > recommendations of the SSAC, specifically to think about adopting their
> > proposals for terminology.
> >
> > I think adopting the basic suggestions to clearly specify registration
> > data, protocol stuff and directory service/display for the end-user
> > does make a lot of sense.
> >
> > I am less convinced that the more detailed and specific terminology
> > suggestions and acronyms would really benefit the readers of our final
> > report.
> >
> > Does anyone have a particular pov or guidance?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Wilfried.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>



-- 




*
*

76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK
t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 ? m: +44 (0)7540 049 322
emily at emilytaylor.eu

*www.etlaw.co.uk*

Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and
Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110928/117e4f41/attachment.html 

From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at  Wed Sep 28 21:00:40 2011
From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet)
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 21:00:40 +0000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] SSAC recommendations regarding terminology
In-Reply-To: <CAKWYFscCvmJJ1Ze2Gk80=qBJQ=Er4DHpL18Hn+fbFNXeaH8b3A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E822389.7060602@CC.UniVie.ac.at>	<EA3AB236-951E-47E5-9082-E02C2AF10780@paypal.com>
	<CAKWYFscCvmJJ1Ze2Gk80=qBJQ=Er4DHpL18Hn+fbFNXeaH8b3A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E838AF8.6020403@CC.UniVie.ac.at>

Emily Taylor wrote:

> Hi guys
> 
> Thanks for absorbing the SSAC document.  SSAC have made a conscious
> effort to include us in their draft-report loop in order to help us with
> our work, which is very good of them.
> 
> For the benefit of members of the team who may be sinking under the load
> of documents to be read, would you mind reproducing the terms that you
> think we should adopt (in the body of an e-mail), and any _brief_
> reasoning which might assist comprehension.

Will do, of course, but probably not before the weekend, as I am about to
travel to Germany from tomorrow, Thursday morning till Friday late evening.

> Much appreciated,
> 
> Emily

Wilfried.


From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Thu Sep 29 18:07:16 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:07:16 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Updated Statement of Interest
Message-ID: <20110929110716.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.b37d7bbda1.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110929/0e055f7d/attachment.html 

From denise.michel at icann.org  Fri Sep 30 18:44:00 2011
From: denise.michel at icann.org (Denise Michel)
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 11:44:00 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Filings of Article 29 Working Party and Data
	Protection Commissioners
In-Reply-To: <4E710D8D.2010702@kathykleiman.com>
References: <4E710D8D.2010702@kathykleiman.com>
Message-ID: <CAPcHvQFiPObroB1OSpcOLwaMUXU3D0ns-xgLPDpFtLK5e3N8qg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Kathy,

ICANN's records have been reviewed and Staff has found no additional Article
29 correspondence beyond the ones that you and Bill have already shared with
the Team.

"Data protection commissioner" is not a title all governments confer so
Staff has included correspondence on Whois from other government officials
that the Team may find useful.

Please let me know if the Team needs anything further on this.

Regards,
Denise


Letter from Hansj?rgen Garstka to Stuart
Lynn<http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/garstka-to-lynn-15jan03.htm>International
Working Group on Data Protection in Telecommunications15 January 2003Whois
policy



Letter From Jonathan Leibowitz to Paul
Twomey<http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/leibowitz-to-twomey-09feb05.pdf>
[PDF,
858 KB]Federal Trade Commission9 February 2005Whois Database

Letter from John Fingleton to Vint
Cerf<http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/fingleton-to-cerf-20jun06.pdf>
[PDF,
51 KB]Office of Fair Trading20 June 2006Proposed change to narrow purpose
definition of publicly available Whois databases

Letter from Michel Parisse to ICANN
<http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/parisse-to-icann-22jun06.pdf>[PDF,
55 KB]Commission de la Protection de la Privee22 June 2006WHOIS Is Privacy
Issues

Letter from Jennifer Stoddart to Vinton
Cerf<http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/stoddart-to-cerf-12jul06.pdf>
[PDF,
72 KB]Privacy Commissioner of Canada12 July 2006Whois Issues


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


On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com>wrote:

>  Dear Liz and Denise,
> On behalf of the Whois Review Team, I would like to request the past
> filings, submissions, letters and comments of data protection commissioners
> speaking/writing to ICANN on Whois issues.
>
> We are looking for any material submitted over the duration of this
> discussion with ICANN.  This could be material of individual data protection
> commissioners who may have written, as well as DP associations, e.g., The
> Article 29 Working Party (and/or its chair) writing to ICANN. (As you know
> the Article 29 Working Party is a group established under the EU Privacy
> Directive and comprised of all national data protection commissioners of the
> EU).
>
> There may be other associations of data protection commissioners that have
> written to us as well, e.g., the International *Data Protection* and
> Privacy *Commissioners* Conference.
>
> I do not think there are many filings, but I do recall they span a long
> period of time, and probably date back to the original Whois Task Forces.
> (4-5 pieces, maybe)
>
> Timeframe: As soon as possible, and by our Marina del Ray meeting next
> week, if possible.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Kathy Kleiman
> Vice-Chair, Whois Review Team
>
> --
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110930/ab8d4422/attachment.html 

From susank at fb.com  Fri Sep 30 22:55:17 2011
From: susank at fb.com (Susan Kawaguchi)
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 22:55:17 +0000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] FW: group-facebook.com -- Whois Data Problem Report
Message-ID: <CAD6B3759A38A247AC29584C29147EA41F2E7171@SC-MBX02-3.TheFacebook.com>

Hello All, 

Thought you would be interested in seeing a follow up email I received on a domain name I reported as inaccurate.  It appears that the compliance team has implemented a new process. 

Susan 

-----Original Message-----
From: no-reply at icann.org [mailto:no-reply at icann.org] 
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2011 12:01 PM
To: Susan Kawaguchi
Subject: group-facebook.com -- Whois Data Problem Report

This message is in follow-up to the Whois Data Problem Report you confirmed
on Wed Aug 10 18:00:29 2011 regarding group-facebook.com.  As indicated to you
at the time of submission, a copy of your report was forwarded to the
sponsoring registrar for investigation.  We would appreciate it if you could
assist us in monitoring registrar compliance with Whois data accuracy
obligations by selecting one of the options below:

    1. The data inaccuracy was corrected.  Please go to the following URL:    
    <http://wdprs.internic.net/cgi/feedback.cgi?s=fdbf081a93676785ba5595abda829e040a1d8fda&r=corrected>

    2. The domain has been deleted or re-registered.  Please go to:
    <http://wdprs.internic.net/cgi/feedback.cgi?s=fdbf081a93676785ba5595abda829e040a1d8fda&r=deleted>

    3. The whois data is still inaccurate.  Please go to:
    <http://wdprs.internic.net/cgi/feedback.cgi?s=fdbf081a93676785ba5595abda829e040a1d8fda&r=unchanged>

    4. None of the above.  Please go to:
    <http://wdprs.internic.net/cgi/feedback.cgi?s=fdbf081a93676785ba5595abda829e040a1d8fda&r=other>

For your reference, the current whois data for the domain is appended below
and your report ID is:
fdbf081a93676785ba5595abda829e040a1d8fda

Thanks again for your assistance.

Best regards,

InterNIC Whois Data Problem Reports System

================================================================
                WHOIS DATA AS OF 2011/9/25



REGISTRAR WHOIS:


Domain Name: GROUP-FACEBOOK.COM 


Registrant:
 Facebook, Inc.
 Domain Administrator (FACEBOOK at FB.COM)
 Palo Alto CA 94304 US
 California
 California,94304
 US
 Tel. +1.6505434800
 Fax. +1.6505434800


Creation Date: 11-Mar-2011 
Expiration Date: 11-Mar-2012


Domain servers in listed order:
 ns1.youhosting.ir
 ns2.youhosting.ir


Administrative Contact:
 Facebook, Inc.
 Domain Administrator (FACEBOOK at FB.COM)
 Palo Alto CA 94304 US
 California
 California,94304
 US
 Tel. +1.6505434800
 Fax. +1.6505434800


Technical Contact:
 Facebook, Inc.
 Domain Administrator (FACEBOOK at FB.COM)
 Palo Alto CA 94304 US
 California
 California,94304
 US
 Tel. +1.6505434800
 Fax. +1.6505434800


Billing Contact:
 Facebook, Inc.
 Domain Administrator (FACEBOOK at FB.COM)
 Palo Alto CA 94304 US
 California
 California,94304
 US
 Tel. +1.6505434800
 Fax. +1.6505434800


Status:SUSPENDED
 Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. 
 In this status the domain name is InActive and will not function.
The data in this whois database is provided to you for information purposes
only, 
that is, to assist you in obtaining information about or related 
to a domain name registration record. We make this information available
"as is", 
and do not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a whois query, you agree
that you will 
use this data only for lawful purposes and that, under no circumstances
will you use this data to: 
(1) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that stress 
or load this whois database system providing you this information; or 
(2) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited, 
commercial advertising or solicitations via direct mail, electronic mail,
or by telephone. 
The compilation, repackaging, dissemination or other use of this data is
expressly prohibited without 
prior written consent from us. The Registrar of record is Directi Internet
Solutions Pvt. Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com. 
We reserve the right to modify these terms at any time. 
By submitting this query, you agree to abide by these terms.


REGISTRY WHOIS:


Whois Server Version 2.0


 Domain Name: GROUP-FACEBOOK.COM
 Registrar: DIRECTI INTERNET SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. D/B/A
PUBLICDOMAINREGISTRY.COM
 Whois Server: whois.PublicDomainRegistry.com
 Referral URL: http://www.PublicDomainRegistry.com
 Name Server: NS1.YOUHOSTING.IR
 Name Server: NS2.YOUHOSTING.IR
 Status: clientDeleteProhibited
 Status: clientHold
 Status: clientTransferProhibited
 Status: clientUpdateProhibited
 Updated Date: 12-aug-2011
 Creation Date: 11-mar-2011
 Expiration Date: 11-mar-2012


================================================================




From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Sun Oct  2 19:51:13 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 12:51:13 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Quick note regarding status of consumer trust survey
Message-ID: <20111002125113.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.df9d9c71dd.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20111002/2f45ef5e/attachment.html 

From seth.reiss at lex-ip.com  Sun Oct  2 21:18:35 2011
From: seth.reiss at lex-ip.com (Seth M Reiss)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 11:18:35 -1000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Quick note regarding status of consumer trust survey
In-Reply-To: <20111002125113.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.df9d9c71dd.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
References: <20111002125113.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.df9d9c71dd.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <000001cc8148$d92f0eb0$8b8d2c10$@reiss@lex-ip.com>

Lynn

 

Maybe you intended this but when I Whois the coca-colacompany.com, the Registrar is CSC CORPORATE DOMAINS, INC.

with the  Whois Server: whois.corporatedomains.com, but I cannot get this server to resolve and I cannot find a Whois link on the CSC website, or maybe I am just doing something wrong?

 

Seth

 

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2011 9:51 AM
To: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Quick note regarding status of consumer trust survey

 

Dear All,

Sending this brief note to advise current status of the Consumer Trust survey.

I had a conference call with the User Insight team last Tuesday and we reviewed all the

suggestions and feedback.  As a result we made several improvements to the questionnaire.

 

Overall, I deferred to the expertise of User Insight in helping us to achieve our objectives.

Some of the suggestions we made are better suited to in person interviews rather than online surveys.

Another consideration was the amount of time required of the survey participants.

 

One point of their advice was to proceed with http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com as the domain

to be used for the lookup exercise.

 

User Insight planned to launch a pilot test to make sure there were no unexpected problems as a

final validation of the questionnaire.

 

I am expecting an updated status from them again tomorrow and will keep you all advised.

Kind regards,

Lynn

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20111002/0db78b6a/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Problem loading page.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 40708 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20111002/0db78b6a/Problemloadingpage.pdf