Re: [nc-deletes] Newest draft

["John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <john@johnberryhill.com>]

> However,
> it is well known that some non commercial registrants have provided
> "inaccurate" WHOIS data as a means of privacy protection.

Proxy, or anonymous, registration is expressly permitted under the terms of
the RAA.  The proxy registrant must still be able to confirm that the domain
name is held on behalf of someone known to the proxy registrant, and must
provide the contact details in the event of a legal dispute (including a
UDRP).

From the RAA:
"3.7.7.3 Any Registered Name Holder that intends to license use of a domain
name to a third party is nonetheless the Registered Name Holder of record and
is responsible for providing its own full contact information and for
providing and updating accurate technical and administrative contact
information adequate to facilitate timely resolution of any problems that
arise in connection with the Registered Name. A Registered Name Holder
licensing use of a Registered Name according to this provision shall accept
liability for harm caused by wrongful use of the Registered Name, unless it
promptly discloses the identity of the licensee to a party providing the
Registered Name Holder reasonable evidence of actionable harm."

"Actionable harm" would not reasonably include the mere provision of "false
contact data", since such provision alone does not harm anyone in any legally
cognizable way I can imagine.  If, however, a TM issue is involved then there
probably would be an avenue for making a reasonable showing of actionable
harm.

On the other hand, "actionable harm" is not limited to any one jurisdiction.
Take the example of, say, rawa.org (The Revolutionary Association of the
Women of Afghanistan).  Although it is a political organization of Afghan
women, the registration was held for a number of years by a party in Pakistan
as a proxy for the organization.  Under the whois policy, the Taliban would
have been able to raise a challenge to the registration data, and the legal
harm (in their legal system) of promoting counter-revolutionary propaganda.
As long as the Pakistani party identified and provided full contact
information of the Afghani principals of the organization when requested by
the Taliban, then there would be no problem.  Of course the internet has not
changed the requirement of people everywhere to abide by the laws of their
jurisdiction.  If propaganda promoting political equality of women is illegal
in your jurisdiction, then you do not have a right to a domain name or to
obfuscate your whois data for spreading your ideas, merely because people
outside of your country are of the opinion women should have political
rights.