[At-Large] privacy, was Impressions from the Whois-Review
franck.martin at gmail.com
Mon Jan 31 23:20:21 UTC 2011
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.
At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
More information about the At-Large