gTLD Registries Constituency statement concerning Whois Combined Task Force Policy/Advice Recommendation 2 on conflicts between national privacy laws and Registries or Registrars contractual obligations to ICANN (21 July 2005)
21 July 2005
The GTLD Registryi Constituency (RyC) Statement on WHOIS COMBINED TASK FORCE
Policy/Advice Recommendation 2 on conflicts between national privacy laws
and registries' or registrars' contractual obligations to ICANNi.
This statement responds to the request for constituency input on the WHOIS COMBINED TASK FORCE Policy/Advice Recommendation 2 on conflicts between national privacy laws and registries' or registrars' contractual obligations to ICANN.
Pursuant to requirements of the GSNO policy development process, the RyC has concluded:
I. Constituency Position
The RyC supports the general principles of the Policy/Advice Recommendation 2 on conflicts between national privacy laws and registries' or registrars' contractual obligations to ICANN. The RyC further believes that the recommended procedures should deal with the possibility of the following:
(1) If exceptions to contractual requirements are made to accommodate local law(s) for one registrar or registry in a local jurisdiction, should the same exceptions be extended to other registrars and registries in that jurisdiction and, if so, how should that take place; and
(2) If exceptions to contractual requirements are made to accommodate local law(s), it is possible that the variation in requirements for different registrars or registries will begin to create a fragmented experience for users and therefore create a need to revisit the contractual requirement
in a broader way.
The RyC also believes that the Combined Task Force should include, in its final Recommendation, a further recommendation that affording tiered access to WHOIS data be available to registrars and registries as a means of complying with local legal requirements when applicable.
II. Method for Reaching Agreement on RyC Position
The RyC drafted and circulated via email a constituency statement, soliciting input from its members. RyC members suggested edits and additions to the draft which were subsequently incorporated into the final constituency statement. The statement was adopted by a unanimous vote. One constituency member, RegistryPro did not take part in the vote.
III. Impact on Constituency
The Policy/Advice Recommendation 2 in its present form would assist the members of the RyC in fulfilling their legal obligations in their respective jurisdictions. It should be noted, however, that the Policy/Advice Recommendation 2 does not purport to provide complete assurance that potential conflicts can be avoided or resolved.
IV. Time Period Necessary to Complete Implementation
We anticipate that the Policy/Advice Recommendation 2 supported by this statement would not require an extensive time period to implement.