[At-Large] privacy, was Impressions from the Whois-Review

[Franck Martin]

It is in every gTLD contract that they must provide a whois service.

but if it is to do THAT whois service, then it is a joke and the onus is on ICANN to set the rules to insure consistency and accuracy.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Auerbach" <karl at cavebear.com>
To: at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Sent: Tuesday, 1 February, 2011 11:48:15 AM
Subject: Re: [At-Large] privacy, was Impressions from the Whois-Review

On 01/31/2011 01:12 PM, Franck Martin wrote:

> Why I agree the WHOIS needs to be accurate and may be non-obfuscated

There is a completely lawful domain name business model in which there 
is *no* record made of who acquired a domain name.

Rather control is vested into a digital certificate - much like a bearer 
bond - which can be issued without capturing identity and transferred 
entirely without knowledge of the registry (a non-repudiation database 
of transfers can be maintained by a third party.)

At least one of the 40 applicants of year 2000 - who are still waiting 
for ICANN - used such a model.

I do find it amusing that on one hand many of us whine when government 
bodies or industrial groups insist that ICANN create thus-and-so policy 
yet at the same time we say that it's just fine for us to insist that 
ICANN create this-and-that policy.

Impositions on lawful activities are impositions on lawful activity 
whether those impositions are advocated by governments, industrial 
actors, or ICANN's so-called "at large advisory" groups.

	--karl--
_______________________________________________
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