ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    USA Goverment Relations Congress Holds Hearing on Whois
    posted by michael on Thursday July 12 2001, @03:45PM

    Anonymous writes "On July 12, the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property held a hearing on "The Whois Database: Privacy and Intellectual Property Issues.""



    The witness list included: Stevan D. Mitchell of the Interactive Digital Software Association, Timothy Trainer of the International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition, Lori Fena of TRUSTe, and Jason Catlett of Junkbusters.

    At the hearing, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) issued a letter to the Subcommittee outlining the free speech and anonymity arguments for supporting only voluntary submission of information to the Whois database.


     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
  • Interactive Digital Software Association
  • International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition
  • TRUSTe
  • Junkbusters
  • Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • letter
  • Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property
  • "The Whois Database: Privacy and Intellectual Property Issues."
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Congress Holds Hearing on Whois | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 9 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: Congress Holds Hearing on Whois
    by hofjes on Friday July 13 2001, @06:59AM (#1302)
    User #60 Info
    eNIC, the .cc registry, has a policy by which its public WHOIS only reports the registrant and nameservers. However, upon payment of a nominal fee, eNIC will provide all WHOIS. Additionally, it provides the registrant with notice that the full WHOIS has been disclosed, and to whom it was disclosed.

    eNIC's model protects the privacy of registrants to a great extent and information against data harvesting, while still providing a quick resolution for IP infringement claimants and domain name purchasers to find registrants.

    Public WHOIS is nice, but should it really be so public?

    As long as IP rights holders, and other claimants, have a mechanism by which they can contact a registrant, does all information need to be public?

    Should a registrant have the right to know when someone is searching for the registrant's information?
    Re: Congress Holds Hearing on Whois
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Friday July 13 2001, @01:36PM (#1311)
    User #2810 Info
    How many cybersquatters in your experience give accurate information in the first place? Look at the UDRP examples of clear cybersquatting, the original contact info is bogus in a vast majority of the cases. Your claim that cybersquatters originally give accurate WHOIS info and then suddenly stop answering phones or faxes (or change numbers) or refuse mail (or change addresses) just because you are on to them over a name is scarce credible. If you have accurate info and then lose them entirely you're in the wrong business. Some actual examples and/or a posting from a non Anon give your claims some weight.

    As a registrant I'm deluged with spam and receive unsolicited phone and fax calls and under an equally (or more) open WHOIS I will receive more. I'm supposed to accept this so that you (who use anonymity) have the right to track down someone who may be infringing a trademark and may have given correct contact info, so that you may receive some sort of redress. How and why does your right trump my right, which is, as Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. put it (approximately): the right most prized by modern man, the right to be left alone.

    Here's some coverage on this from WIRED. -g


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com