Re: Re[6]: [ga-sys] Registrants Charter - FREEDOMS - Part 1

["NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
To: "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>
Cc: <ga-sys@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 8:05 PM
Subject: Re[6]: [ga-sys] Registrants Charter - FREEDOMS - Part 1


> Hello Joanna,
>
> Wednesday, May 16, 2001, 7:01:59 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:
> > And the contract you
> >> agreed to when you registered those domains specifically permits the
> >> inclusion of that information in the publicly available whois servers.
>
> > The contract is onerous and was not entered into voluntarily. It can be
> > contested.
>
> Last time I checked, no registrars were forcing people to register
> domain names.
>
> Is there a registrar in Europe that is holding people hostage until
> they register a com/net/org domain?
>
> I doubt it.
>
> That makes it voluntary.
>
> You can always use one of those anonymous third level domain
> registries.

Give me a break. Doing business in other than dot com is wasteful use of
space and you know that. As far as whois some of us want that info displayed
and others do not. I respect the opinions of those that want it hidden, but
would not opt to do so myself.

There are several things that should not be something you HAVE to do in
order to get a domain name. I won't go into agreeing with the UDRP on this
list, but will address the privacy issue.

Joanna, people do have enough ways to avoid too much real info is posted on
a domain name in whois. I don't think any laws are needed in that regard,
however one might be needed if the Registrars refuse to give each registrant
of domain names some suggestions in this regard.

The danger is for uninformed users who register a domain name. They do not
know the options because no effort is made to make sure they do know the
options. That should be the responsibiltiy of the Registrar, not the
individual. They should assume every individual wants the right to not have
all of their info publicly displayed. Just because people haven't asked for
an option is NOT an indicator that it would not be desired if offered.

In the US, in states that have Megan's Law, there is a cd rom at each
Sheriff's Department that has the info on all registered sex offenders that
live in that county. Anyone has the right to go down and view the cd rom to
see if someone in their neighborhood is a danger to their children. Very few
people actually go look at the cd rom. That doesn't mean they want their
children molested. It means they don't have the proper knowledge given to
them about why they should go down to take a look.

Just an analogy. Not meant to be inflammatory. I consider the analogy a much
more serious matter. Since I run a missing children's organization, it's
just the first one I thought of. I publish materials all the time to inform
more people about the cd rom and why they should go view it. Either some org
should do that for Registrants of domain names. To do that some approval to
contact Domain Name Registyrant should be afforded such an organization
without it being considered spam. otherwise the Registrars should do it
themselves as a matter of responsibility, which unfortunately I find most of
them lacking in.


>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh
> mailto:william@userfriendly.com
> Owner, Userfriendly.com
> Userfriendly.com Domains
> The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-sys@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-sys" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

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