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

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

I have one thing to add to this debate, in answer to the argument often
cited in relation to "real property" reporting requirements. The argument
goes like this (usually trotted out by William Walsh)....details of property
ownership are in the public domain, hence the WHOIS requirement for domain
names should be no different.

Well, as somebody who has been earning their living from running a
successful real property business on more than one continent for more than 2
decades, allow me to disagree. There is no comparison.

On the one hand, there is a need for real time access to info of Domain name
ownership, on the other, there is no real time requirement - and if there
were, it would not take many months for the public registers of who owns
what to become publicly available, as is the case throughout the world.
There is no Real Time database available for real property. Period.

As a practical business matter, this means that the Real Estate Industry
simply does not rely on legal reporting requirements in order to gain either
a) competitive advantage or b) a database of prospective clients or even c)
comparables.

Let's face it, the push for WHOIS accuracy is simply related to businesses
that obviously feel they cannot survive as do businesses in other
industries, which is, we acquire our information by keeping our ear to the
ground. Accuracy takes too long, and we don't expect coddling to survive.
Obviously WXW and his want it delivered on a plate with guarantees of
accuracy. Get real.

Regards,
Joanna

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of George
> Kirikos
> Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 10:50 AM
> To: Karl Auerbach; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy
>
>
> 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