RE: [ga] Bulk acces...

["J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

At 23:19 05/09/02, Dassa wrote:
>My own idea is to make even more information available, there should not 
>be any anonymous activity on the Networks, all activity should be 
>traceable.  Take away the fear factor

In a debate over that subject in France (we were the first to introduce 
privacy laws and we have quite an experience about social relations with 
online personal directories, since the Minitel was frist about 
telephone  and added value directories). The debate was hot as anywhere, 
with some very interesting remarks about memory aspects (please remember 
that we also have very "innovative" laws in term of anti-racist actions: 
private assocaition can directly prosecute on racist delicts, like in the 
Yahoo case).

1. we clearly identified that the real novelty was that computers do not 
forget. You are never frogiven.
2. that computers do not correct mistakes. So a wrong entry is for ever.
3. that the real thing is not the databases which are static and can 
possibly be corrected, but the profiling which is just a dynamic process 
using any data. For example whois entries are not only important though the 
data, but though the dates of the entries
4. that the concept of Big Brother knowing everything on everyone was 
outdated and replaced by the Leviathan concept of everyone knowing 
everything true on wrong on everyone without any correction being really 
possible because no one knows where the information is and has been hacked 
from.

Globally the conclusion was that by nature all the data and information 
should be anonymous for self protection. That database oriented privacy 
laws should be extended to profiling, ie that you should be given the right 
to have the details of any profiling and to make them corrected as well as 
the profiling parameters.

It also was that democracy and civil right protection was to give you the 
capacity to sign your name without fearing from doing that. This is very 
interesting, because in the whois case it means the reverse of what VRSN 
and ICANN do. And when you consider it, it is quite positive.

The proposition would be the following.

1. registration are secret and anonymous.
2. there is an asbolute right to hide oneself behind a proxy
3. disclosure can only be otained on international warrant

but

4. registrants have the right to disclose their names
5. in such a case they must demonstrate it
6. wrong names will be considered an offense and prosecuted

This makes the whois a space of trust. Instead of considering negatively a 
wrong address, UDRP panelists would consider positively the disclosure of 
the address.

I suppose the result in term of average accuracy would be the same. But it 
would be extremely different in term of trust, e-commerce etc.. The whois 
address could be certified. Adding to the trust snice an online charged 
letter could be sent to the registrant.
jfc