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

[eric@hi-tek.com]

Ok.

Let us lay off the criminal crap and stick to civil rules.
Fine line maybe but bad joojoo.

Eric

George Kirikos wrote:

> Hi Allan,
>
> --- Allan Liska <allan@allan.org> wrote:
> > I would like to suggest an alternative to the legal contact though.
> > If the goal is to reach someone responsible for the domain, why not
> > just use the technical contact field?  It should be trivial for
> > registrars to suppress Billing and Administrative contacts, and only
> > display the technical contact.  The technical contact would be the
> > ISP, Hosting provider, or someone within the company who can answer
> > questions and deal with problems authoritatively.  The technical
> > contact would not be allowed to release any contact information about
> > a domain without the consent of the domain owner, or a warrant of
> > some
> > sort.
>
> That would be a reasonable compromise also. It recognizes that privacy
> isn't an "absolute" right. There are benefits and costs to it, as I've
> elaborated on before (e.g.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc10/msg00399.html ).
>
> One thing that should be incorporated is the notion of a "Safe Harbor",
> similar to, but extending the DMCA provisions, see:
>
> http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/512.html
>
> This would go beyond simply copyright infringement, though, and
> encompass all illegal activities (civil and criminal) associated with a
> domain, i.e. for which the registrant (if not able to be identified)
> would have been liable.
>
> Thus, if the technical contact (or the "legal contact", in the
> alternative) doesn't do the "right things", they are held responsible
> for the improper behaviour. Most upstanding members of the community do
> the right things when confronted with abuse, and those safe harbor
> provisions would limit their liability. For those who harbour abusers,
> though, the responsibility and risk of doing the wrong things should be
> made abundantly clear.
>
> Thus, an abusive or criminal registrant who seeks absolute anonymity
> can't merely shift the costs to their victims, or to society at large.
> If their proxy/agent/legal contact is rational, they would charge a
> high price to support such abusers, if they continue to expose them to
> liability.
>
> The non-abusive registrant who seeks greater privacy can do so at low
> or even zero cost, via a proxy, since their technical/legal contact
> doesn't face any risk from bad behaviour from, say, Karl's daughter, a
> rape crisis center, or other folks who want more privacy.
>
> 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