[Privsec] ALERT: ICANN Privacy Progress to be Derailed at
Marrakech Meeting
karen banks
karenb at gn.apc.org
Mon Jun 19 16:29:32 BST 2006
hi
i am going to forward the priv-sec proposal for
the IGF to milton as it lists the groups we would
like to work with.. they may be useful also..
and this reminds me - we must move on making
proposals for an event/workshop for the IGF - the
deadline is July 15th and i think if we put
together a good, multi-stakeholder proposal, it
has a good chance of being taken seriously..
ralf - can you start a thread on that?
karen
At 16:24 19/06/2006, Robert Guerra wrote:
>FYI: ICANN has been making progress in
>recognizing the need to protect privacy of
>domain name registrant personal info, but it
>seems that opposing forces are now causing ICANN
>to make an about-face. There is an opportunity
>to influence the outcome of this debate. See below.
>
>
>
>----------
>From: <mailto:KathrynKL at aol.com>KathrynKL at aol.com [mailto:KathrynKL at aol.com]
>Sent: Wed 6/14/2006 11:34 PM
>To: Subject: ALERT: ICANN Privacy Progress to be Derailed at Marrakech Meeting
>
>Dear Mr. Giovanni Buttarelli, Ms. Stephanie Perrin and Dr. Alexander Dix
>
>Alert: ICANN’s Privacy Progress in the Whois
>Databases Being Derailed by US and Australian
>Governments; Timely Communication to ICANN Will
>Help Balance and Inform Debate
>
>From: Professor Milton Mueller, Kathryn
>Kleiman, Esq., Co-Founders, ICANN's
>Noncommercial Users Constituency and Longtime Whois Task Force Members
>
>(Formatted version attached)
>
>We need your help. As you know, after years of
>work on data protection laws, ICANN’s GNSO
>Council finally took concrete steps to protect
>privacy in the Whois databases. On April 12,
>2006, the GNSO Council adopted a clearly defined
>“Purpose” for the Whois Databases – one that is
>narrow, technical and compatible with the
>original purpose of this data. At last, we
>followed your opinions, speeches and guidance!
>
>Opposition began immediately. The US Government
>is using every forum with ICANN, public and
>private, to criticize the vote. Statements of
>Suzanne Sene, US Department of Commerce/NTIA,
>openly question whether data protection laws
>apply to ICANN, and whether data protection
>commissioners have enforcement powers.
>
>Following the US lead, the Australian Government
>quickly wrote to criticize the Whois
>vote. Australia’s letter called for all
>personal data in the Whois database to remain
>fully open and completely accessible. Letter
>attached below. This week, the International
>Trademark Association, a group with historic
>weight in the ICANN process, loudly voiced its
>concerns and urged ICANN Chairman Vint Cerf to
>reverse the Whois privacy work and keep all data
>(personal and otherwise) open and accessible.
>
>The GNSO Council’s vote represented a historical
>alignment. Registrars, Registries and ICANN’s
>Noncommercial Users Constituency all voted to
>respect data protection laws worldwide. Yet the
>GNSO Council is only an interim step. As one of
>ICANN’s “Supporting Organizations,” we only
>report our policy recommendations to the ICANN
>Board. The ICANN Board, Officers and staff make
>the final decisions. We know they listen
>carefully to loud voices – and rely increasingly
>on ICANN’s Government Advisory Committee (“the GAC”).
>
>Opposition continues to mount through the US-led
>GAC. As you know, the GAC never held its
>long-promised meeting with Data Protection
>Commissioners. To date it has only heard law
>enforcement and “consumer protection” views, and
>thus, it puts forward only law enforcement and consumer protection views.
>
>We learned today that at the ICANN meeting in
>Marrakech, the GAC will sponsor a Joint GAC/GNSO
>meeting on Whois -- with at least five GAC
>speakers. We expect each speaker to urge the
>GNSO to repeal the Purpose of Whois. (Meeting
>scheduled for Monday, June 26, 10:30 AM – 12:30
>PM.) Despite so many members from countries
>with comprehensive data protection laws, GAC’s
>current message is an anti-privacy message
>one: the Whois databases must remain completely
>open and accessible, with no protection for the
>personal data of tens of millions of domain name registrants.
>
>Unfortunately, ICANN has yet to receive a single
>letter in support of the work of the GNSO
>Council on the Purpose of Whois. Would you be
>willing to write to ICANN in support of the GNSO
>Council work to date? Would you be willing to
>work with your GAC representative to help
>him/her better understand and explain your
>country’s data protection laws to the GAC and to ICANN?
>
>We know ICANN well. Input now would greatly
>help to balance the debate, dampen the impact of
>law enforcement criticism, and guide ICANN Board
>members, officers and staff. This is a critical moment.
>
>Thank you for your review and
>assistance. Please let us know if there is
>anything we can do to help assist you. Are
>there other data protection leaders you recommend we contact?
>
>Sincerely,
>Professor Milton Mueller, Syracuse University
>Kathryn Kleiman, Esq., McLeod, Watkinson & Miller, Washington DC
>
>
>Appendix I:
>Supplemental Materials on Whois Purpose
>
>A. Background/GNSO Council Work on Purpose of Whois
>
>On April 12, 2006, the GNSO Council took a
>pro-privacy position. They determined that the
>Whois database serves a narrow, technical
>purpose (consistent with the original purpose of
>ICANN and the limited mission of ICANN).
>
>As adopted by the GNSO Council:
>
>“The purpose of the gTLD Whois service is to
>provide information sufficient to contact a
>responsible party for a particular gTLD domain
>name who can resolve, or reliably pass on data
>to a party who can resolve, issues related to
>the configuration of the records associated with
>the domain name within a DNS nameserver.”
>
>This technical language means that the Whois
>databases will serve the narrow, and technical
>and traditional purposes of the Domain Name
>System – registration of domain names (setting
>them up) and configuration of domain names
>(making sure domain names can be “resolved” and
>be or located in the global domain name system
>via the located in the global Internet system,
>including correct configuration in the main “look-up” tables).
>
>The Purpose adopted by Council was originally
>called “Formulation 1.” In adopting it, the
>GNSO Council rejected “Formulation 2” – an
>essentially unbounded and unlimited Purpose for
>the Whois Databases. Formulation 2 was (based
>not only on traditional technical purposes, but
>all uses of domain names, including content of
>websites). based on the idea that the Whois
>Database served not only technical purposes, but
>the monitoring of all domain name use and
>content. It is a view oriented in digital rights management.
>
>Formulation 2 (Rejected as overbroad,
>inconsistent with original purpose, and outside
>the scope and mission of ICANN and the domain name system):
>
>“The purpose of the gTLD Whois service is to
>provide information sufficient to contact a
>responsible party or parties for a particular
>gTLD domain name who can resolve, or reliably
>pass on data to a party who can resolve,
>technical, legal or other issues related to the
>registration or use of a domain name.” [emphasis added]
>
>Minutes of the GNSO Council’s vote on the
>Purpose of Whois can be found at
><http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12apr06.shtml>http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12apr06.shtml.
>
>
>
>B. Opposition Heard To Date:
>
>The negative voices are strong within
>ICANN. Many are quietly lobbying in the
>background; others are public. Here are some
>letters of opposition that we know have been
>widely circulated to the Board, Officers and staff of ICANN:
>
>Opposition by the Australian Government,
><http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg02407.html>http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg02407.html
>(especially ironic because the Australian ccTLD,
>.AU, has some of the strongest data protection
>regulations of any country code, and protects
>not only personal data but corporate data as well). .
>
>International Trademark Association,
><http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/msg01000.html>http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/msg01000.html
>(for historical reasons, a group with close ties
>to the ICANN Board and a heavyweight in the ICANN process).
>
>Letters in support of the GNSO Council and the
>combined efforts of the Registrar, Registry and
>Noncommercial Constituencies (and Nominating
>Committee Representatives): None.
>
>C. Timely Support for the GNSO Work
>
>ICANN starts a meeting in Marrakech on June
>23rd. The Whois Task Force just learned today
>that the GAC plans to have at least five
>speakers giving strong anti-privacy speeches
>(intended to block the Whois work).
>
>Some opportunities for input include:
>
>1. Contacting your country’s GAC
>representative. The GAC is a loosely organized
>group with no official requirements for
>government representatives. It is also
>completely closed to other members of the ICANN
>community. We are told that discussions of data
>protection laws are nonexistent in GAC meetings
>(and the US canceled the only formal data
>protection meeting to have taken place in GAC
>with Dr. Dix). With your encouragement and
>guidance, perhaps your GAC representatives will
>take a clearer position at GAC meetings in
>support of (and explaining) the EU data protection laws.
>
>GAC representatives:
>Canada: Mr Malcolm Andrew, Industry Canada,
><mailto:andrew.malcolm at ic.gc.ca>andrew.malcolm at ic.gc.ca
>
>Germany: Mr Michael Leibrandt
>Federal Ministry of Economics, Technology and Labour
><mailto:leibrandt at bmwi.bund.de>leibrandt at bmwi.bund.de
>
>Italy: Mr Stefano Trumpy, Vice Chair
>Institute of Informatics and Telematics of the
>National Council for Research,
><mailto:stefano.trumpy at iit.cnr.it>stefano.trumpy at iit.cnr.it
>and
>Mrs Luisa Franchina, Ministry of Communications
><mailto:luisa.franchina at comunicazioni.it>luisa.franchina at comunicazioni.it
>
>EC: Mr Michael Niebel, Head Of Unit
>Directorate General for the Information Society
>and the Media (DG INFSO),
><mailto:michael.niebel at cec.eu.int>michael.niebel at cec.eu.int
>
>Mr William Dee, DG INFSO,
><mailto:william.dee at cec.eu.int>william.dee at cec.eu.int
>
>Source:
><http://gac.icann.org/web/contact/reps/index.shtml>http://gac.icann.org/web/contact/reps/index.shtml
>
>
>
>2. Participating in a GAC meeting. The GAC Meetings in Marrakech are:
>- June 24-June 25 (private closed GAC meetings)
>: - Monday, June 26th, Joint GAC/GNSO Meeting and with
>many anti-privacy speeches planned by GAC.
>
>The GAC is loosely organized with no clear
>membership requirement other than government
>credentials. The US NTIA regularly adds FBI
>agents and Federal Trade Commission staff to its
>“delegation,” and these officials participate
>actively in the closed GAC discussion on
>Whois. They influence the debate and push GAC
>to keep Whois open and completely accessible,
>without any data protection. Were you to attend
>a meeting, you would have a similar opportunity
>to participate in this closed forum.
>
>3. Send a Personal Letter to ICANN Chairman Vint
>Cerf and/or President Paul Twomey (former Chair
>of GAC from Australia). They are closely
>reading letters on the Whois issue and, to date,
>have only receive letters critical to the work of the GNSO Council.
>
>Email
>addresses:
><mailto:Vint at google.com>Vint at google.com and
><mailto:Twomey at icann.org>Twomey at icann.org
>
>4. Share such letters with GNSO Council Chairman
>Bruce Tonkin of Melbourne IT. He circulates them to all GNSO Constituencies.
>
>Email
>address:
><mailto:bruce.tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>bruce.tonkin at melbourneit.com.au.
>
>5. Participate in the GAC/GNSO meeting on Whois
>-- Monday, June 26th–- in person, by
>teleconference or by videotaped message. We can
>assist you with the logistics of requesting
>remote participation. It would be hard for GAC
>to turn down your offer to participate,
>particularly if it came as a request from but
>the assistance of your country’s GAC representative would be a great help.
>
>Date: Monday, June 26th, 10:30 AM – 12:30 PM
>
>6. Ask your GAC representative to deliver a
>message from you at the GAC meeting, and perhaps
>a letter from you to the GAC
>delegates. (perhaps including a copy of a
>letter from you to the GAC and ICANN).
>
>7. Encourage your GAC representative to meet
>with us. Milton and I , together with
>Registries and Registrars, are ready to hold
>meetings in Marrakech with GAC representatives
>to discuss share our detailed knowledge of the
>background, and history and abuses of the Whois
>database of Whois work in the GNSO. We know
>firsthand the many abuses of the Whois data
>(including stalking, harassing, spamming and
>profiling). With your urging, perhaps these we
>could hold these meetings (Kathryn Kleiman
>arrives in Marrakech on Thursday, June 22nd). meetings will be possible.
>
>Email: <mailto:Kathy at KathyKleiman.com>Kathy at KathyKleiman.com
><mailto:Mueller at syr.edu>Mueller at syr.edu
>
>Attachment Appendix II:
>Letter to ICANN from Australian Government,
>April 13, 2006,
><http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg02407.html>http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg02407.html
>
>
>[council] Input from the Australian Government on the WHOIS service
>* To: <council at xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>* Subject: [council] Input from the Australian
>Government on the WHOIS service
>* From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>* Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 21:14:22 +1000
>* Cc: <gnso-dow123 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>* Sender: owner-council at xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>* Thread-index: AcZe62pF2rsC2Ox1RTm5WvMNEaTPRQ==
>* Thread-topic: Input from the Australian Government on the WHOIS service
>
>Hello All,
>
>The note below was sent to me four hours ago as chair of the GNSO
>Council.
>
>Regards,
>Bruce Tonkin
>
>
>AUSTRALIA'S CONTRIBUTION TO GNSO COUNCIL ON WHOIS
>
>Australia would like to reiterate to the GNSO Council the position it
>conveyed during the GNSO Council - Government Advisory Committee (GAC)
>Working Group meeting on 26 March 2006.
>
>On the information available to us, Formulation 2, as identified in the
>Final Task Force Report on the Purpose of Whois and of the Whois
>Contacts, appears to better reflect the public policy interests of a
>fully functional Whois regime from an Australian perspective.
>
>At this point, Australia considers that Whois should:
>
>* satisfy the traditional and ongoing goal of ensuring the
>security and stability of the Internet;
>
>* provide the ability to identify and respond to those involved in
>criminal activity such as child pornography, 'phishing' and identity
>theft;
>
>* provide an appropriate level of data to any user that seeks it
>including, for example, civil and criminal law enforcement officials,
>online consumers, network operators, intellectual property rights
>holders and registrars and registries;
>
>* support national laws and global agreements associated with
>privacy, trade practices, consumer protection, intellectual property
>rights and copyright protection; and
>
>* operate in a manner that is technically feasible and cost
>effective for registrars and registries, and
>does not rely solely on the registrant to be implementable.
>
>We appreciate that Whois is a complex issue with a range of interests.
>Given this, we consider that it is important that the GAC and GNSO
>Council continue to exchange information and views.
>
>Australia will work with other GAC members to ensure that the GAC is
>well placed to have effective dialogue with the GNSO community in
>Marrakesh.
>
>ASHLEY CROSS
>GAC Representative -AUSTRALIA
>April 2006
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Privsec mailing list
>Privsec at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/privsec
More information about the Privsec
mailing list