[At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Community Input Requested on Two Draft Statements from ALAC to the ICANN Board

[Patrick Vande Walle]

Evan,

On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 08:07:27 -0400, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:
 
> Well, of course, especially when the "privacy" is desired because you're
> trying to con and steal and WHOIS.
> 
> Sorry, but refusing to be identified -- when using a facility primarily
> used to _provide_ identity -- seems absurd.
> 
> Registrars can perhaps offer proxy/escrow services, then, as part of
> their arsenal of tools to sell registrants for that kind of thing. You
> can get an unlisted phone number, but you pay for that and the phone
> company still maintains correct records on who owns a certain line.

Depends on the country. Over here (in Belgium, but also in other European
countries), being unlisted is the default, unless you specifically
_require_  your number to be added to the public directory. 

There is no cost to get unlisted. The underlying logic is that privacy is a
fundamental human right, and these are not for sale. I would not agree to
pay for freedom of expression, either.

Obviously, the phone company will provide the subscriber's details to a law
enforcement authority showing proper and written credentials.

> The right to privacy is not an absolute one -- it has numerous limits
> and is often subservient to many other human rights (such as the legal
> right to confront one's accuser).

Fully agree. The normal process against libel, defamation, trademark
infringments, etc in most countries is to file a complaint with the law
enforcement agencies and wait for them to obtain the information.

Patrick