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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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)

    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    False registration contact information would be a crime | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 39 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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: False registration contact information would b
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Tuesday May 07 2002, @09:05AM (#6175)
    User #2810 Info
    I fail to see why WHOIS data needs to be public. As long as it remains so, if I want privacy I must either use someone else willing to act as a go-between (and this normally costs money), or lie. I should not have to do either. I have a right to privacy that I don't think should be trumped by others' rights to my data. And now if this law goes through, I may have to act criminally just to protect my privacy.

    This isn't about giving law enforcement access to accurate information if someone is using a domain name to commit a crime. Criminals will continue to give false information because they are already acting against the law, breaking another law will be no big deal. Alternatively, they can use someone else as the go-between who cannot identify them, such services already exist online. To the extent that law enforcement believes it can track down the party involved in criminal acts via a domain name, it should have to get a court order to access the data.

    I have yet to hear a compelling argument for why WHOIS data needs to be public. I don't even think there needs to be a published email contact address. Spammers or others can still try *@that.domain. If the data is held in private by the registrar, they can give it up if ordered to do so by a court order. Likewise, if the domain name is the subject of a UDRP proceeding, the data could be made available by the registrar at the request of the panel.

    One site I am involved with works to oppose hate groups. Most of its principals live in Canada. Two of them have had their automobiles torched, one has had their house firebombed. Death threats are common. None of this was due to WHOIS data, some of the principals also act in opposition to hate groups in the real world and can be found if someone is determined enough. But none of the principals are easy to find, for their own safety. Though they have telephones you won't find them in a telephone book, for example. Many criminals presumably also have telephones, should there therefore be a law that everyone must publicly list their telephone number and street address?

    If entering accurate WHOIS data can put one at risk in one of the most peaceful countries in the world, one can easily see that those involved with sites taking controversial stands elsewhere in the world could be put in harm's way through such a law. I am actually unclear on what this law might mean internationally. If I am in the US and register a .co.uk domain and give false WHOIS data, is that a crime? While I am in Canada I have lived and travelled extensively in the US. Do I become a criminal only when I cross the border because I've given false WHOIS data for an .org domain? What about a .ca domain? As the root resides in the US, does this become a de facto global law? And BTW, here is an article about another US Bill, the "Truth in Domain Names Act," which would make it a crime to use a misleading Web site name to trick minors into visiting pornographic Web sites. While I have argued that something should be done about this, I am unclear how a US law can/will be used internationally.

    I am less optimistic about the WHOIS Bill than Bret Fausett seems to be. Isn't entering fraudulent data an attempt to defraud by definition? A kiddie porn site, for example, may not be operating to monetarily defraud anyone. Does that mean this law couldn't be used against them?

    This isn't about law enforcement though, they already have powers to, for example, get info from registrars regarding the credit card used to register a name, which is less likely to be bogus than WHOIS data, and will probably remain so even if this law is passed. This is a law by and for the Intellectual Property folks. I don't think property rights of any kind should trump the right to privacy, and even the right to be free from physical harm. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: False registration contact information would b
    by RFassett on Tuesday May 07 2002, @10:53AM (#6177)
    User #3226 Info | http://www.enum.info
    when my personal information is being sold to third parties w/o my knowledge or consent, then I have a right to privacy. When documentation exists that third parties mine the publicly accessible database to gather my personal information for marketing, then I have a right to privacy.

    I have 3 e-mail addresses: 1) for work, 2) for personal, and 3) for Whois. Guess which one gets the relentless spam?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: False registration contact information would b
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Tuesday May 07 2002, @10:58AM (#6178)
    User #2810 Info
    I disagree that I only have a right when it is given to me. While rights are often granted, and often have to be fought for, I think you have it backwards. I have the right to do whatever I want so long as there is no law saying I don't have that right. Even if you don't accept that, being in Canada there is a Canadian Privacy Act which does grant me the right to privacy, so I guess I could point to that. If in the US I could point to this:
    The right to be left alone -- the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized men.
    To protect that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

    ~Justice Louis Brandeis in Olmstead v. U.S. (1928).
    So is public WHOIS data a justifiable intrusion? I don't think so. The argument isn't over whether I have privacy rights, that seems a strange assertion. I do have privacy rights by law, and it appears those in the US do too. But no right is absolute, it must be balanced against other rights. The argument, it seems to me, is whether the right to privacy should prevail over the right to protect one's intellectual property. I think it does, or should. If one is allegedly abusing another's intellectual property, only then should one give up some right to privacy. The onus should be on the injured party to first allege and then prove an injury, rather than requiring innocent parties to give up their right to privacy when they have done no wrong. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • 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