Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

[eric@hi-tek.com]

George,

I believe you to be wrong.  Law enforcement can get the records anytime
they wish.
No one else has a need to know unless they have a crisis and then the
courts will help them.
Privacy should not be a secondary thought but a primary one.
Where in the hell did a right to know the address of a domain name holder
come from?
It is ludicrous and Byzantine.  Render onto Caesar which is his and that
don't include my 19 year olds address.

Eric

George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
>
> --- Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com> wrote:
> > The interests of a few trademark owners is hardly a reason to use a
> > system
> > - DNS whois - that is highly susceptable to false or erroneous data
> > and,
> > when accurate, is a major violation of privacy.
>
> It's not only the IP community who is in favour of an accurate WHOIS.
> Law enforcement would like it to be accurate. As would businesses and
> individuals who want to know who they're dealing with when conducting
> electronic transactions, or who need to trace the sources of various
> publications, etc. These aren't medical or criminal records being
> published over the 'net -- those are what I would consider "major
> violations of privacy."
>
> > Except for domain names, I know of no non-dangerous instrumentality
> > for
> > which the purchaser is required to divulge private information onto a
> > public register that has no form of access control and that conforms
> > to no
> > privacy regime, no matter how minimal or weak.
>
> Many business licenses/incorporations allow for anyone to look up who
> the owner/directors of that business are, although it depends on the
> jurisdiction, perhaps. Exercise for readers: A domain name can be a
> dangerous instrument! ;)
>
> > In addition, any acceptable whois, whether it be for IP or DNS, ought
> > to
> > conform to the standard set of privacy principles - among which are
> > that
> > those who query the data must prove their legitimate need for the
> > data,
> > identify themselves, prove their identity, and be known to the data
> > subject.
>
> Would you support the "compromise" I've mentioned in the past, namely
> the creation of a "Legal Contact" role (which could be the ISP,
> Technical Contact, the Registrant, or someone else the Registrant
> chooses to use) who is held legally responsible for problems
> originating from a domain, with accurate info that IS in the WHOIS for
> that contact? I think that's all people ultimately need to reach,
> someone who is responsible.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html