[nc-transfer] Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ga] Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [nc-transfer] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] WLS proposal

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

God bless America!

At 10:59 18/06/02, William X Walsh wrote:
>The use a PO Box or private mail box facility, or one of the new
>breed of "domain agencies" who let you substitute their information
>for your own, acting as your substitute point of contact.

So, I understand why you support the proposition: you will open your domain 
agency :-)

>How you protect your privacy is up to you, you decide what level of 
>protection you want, and you do it yourself.

Yeap! If you are a poor old chap, your are not entitled any law protection 
that a bright, rich one can pay for. Wild Wide Web.

>Why should anyone mandate whois be private, when property ownership isn't, 
>anywhere in the United States.

I am sorry WXW, but I do not give a damn about the US law as far as gTLDs 
are concerned. Or I will start a ".com" clone in Europe. After all I ran 
"com" for years long before NetSol :-)

>And like whois, they are required by statute

required by statute? who did vote that? Just because some day Jon Postel 
found it advisable when managing names in University environment where 
people move quite often and there are sponsors around. So you need 4 names 
and addresses per DNs...

>to make the information available in bulk format to companies who 
>aggregate this information, and then turn around and provide public access 
>to the aggregate database for searching.
>
>Using one of these databases, I can get a list of real property owned by 
>you, Barbara, anywhere in the United States, and all the associated 
>addresses, including any outstanding mortgages or liens.

Another reason why we should remove the ICANN from the US jurisdiction and 
put it under International status as proposed by the ITU/T.