[At-Large] 9th Circuit Court ruling on ICANN Contract.

[Derek Smythe]

On 2010/12/22 20:11, Avri Doria wrote:
.....
>
> So all the avenues for knowing who you are dealing wit exist as long as the proper processes of the law are used.  And since there are lots of civilian organization more than ready to help the law with their investigative process and assuming that we do not make all information leaking and whistle blowing  illegal, it should be possible for the law to do its job.
>
And that is exactly my point, do you? Reality shows not. Many times 
hidden under the privacy protection is bogus or ID theft details.

In fact, upon learning of ID theft in a domain registration, one of 
the largest registrars changes the public whois to one where the 
registrant name still shows, but their own privacy address. They then 
park the domain.

This is a case of a minority, as I stated previously, spoiling it for 
others.

So imagine the time this wastes for law enforcement. Or imagine the 
costs in a civil case to obtain the details which are useless and 
virtually unverified. Imagine the time delays.

I have no issue with privacy in domains, except there is no real 
verification mechanism. A mail to a free unverified email address is 
no verification. As for credit card details, the recent mentioned 
neighbors of wikileaks.info if a great supply for credit card details 
complete with social security numbers, addresses, telephone numbers etc.

This leads to unaccountability as opposed to privacy.

D


> a.
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>