RE: [ga] WHOIS data on .org domains

["Abel Wisman" <abel@able-towers.com>]

I assume that will be the reasoning behind arresting all
telecommunications personalle in the USA, because one can call countries
on those lists.

In all honesty, it is a bunch of baloney!

They have no right nor obligation to yank any domain and if this is the
us attitude to be, then pals let's remove all of Icann and the root
servers from the usa, because by this way of directing us law upon the
internet they are de-stabilizing the internet.

Abel


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf Of John
Berryhill Ph.D. J.D.
Sent: 14 February 2003 04:11
To: Ram Mohan; [GA]
Subject: Re: [ga] WHOIS data on .org domains



From: "Ram Mohan" <rmohan@afilias.info>
>
> At this point, the only information that PIR's database has regarding 
> <hizbollah.org> is that Network Solutions is the sponsoring registrar 
> for the domain, as well as domain creation/update/expiration 
> information and nameserver information -- similar to .COM & .NET 
> today.
>
> Upon transition to a thick registry, the contact information will be 
> stored in PIR's databases, but the "ownership" of this information 
> remains that of the sponsoring registrar (like today).

I understand the point, but the "ownership" concept is not going to help
PIR.

Did you notice that the Iraq Satellite Television Channel happened to
lose their domain name at iraqtv.ws this week, and that somehow the
domain name has been rendered unregistrable in the .ws TLD?  There is a
reason for that. Did you notice that the Iraqi government domain name
uruklink.net is no longer registered through Register.com.  There is a
reason for that, too.

My question was about "knowledge", not "ownership".   When you are
getting
paid for supplying technical support services, what matters is whether
you know to whom those services are being rendered.  Right now, PIR can
deny knowledge that it is being paid for supplying services ultimately
rendered to Hezbollah, an OFAC-designated organization.  When the
"thick" transition is made, they lose that deniability.

I'll give you an example that perhaps you can relate to.  The technical
contact for the .iq top-level domain is in jail in Texas for, among
other allegations, sending computer parts to Malta.  Is it illegal to
send computer parts to Malta?  Nope.  But the US government alleges that
those parts were trans-shipped, with his knowledge, to destinations in
Syria and Libya.

What matters is what you know.  The fact that Verisign is the primary
contractor to Hezbollah in the case of hizbollah.org doesn't get the
registry off the hook once they know that it is *their* servers which
are providing the authoritative answer for queries seeking
hizbollah.org, thus rendering tangible technical support to an
OFAC-designated terrorist organization in contravention of US law.  Does
US law rule the internet?  Nope.  Does it rule where PIR is, and more
importantly, where PIR's directors, management, and employees are?  It
surely does.

OFAC compliance can be automated, thanks to data files available from
the US Treasury Department and third-party vendors.  There is no "oh,
gee, but we have a lot of customers" excuse for violating OFAC
regulations, and providing technical support on a commercial basis to
OFAC designated organizations is not some kind of free speech issue.



--
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@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