[At-Large] Impressions from the Whois-Review
karl at cavebear.com
Tue Feb 1 00:11:37 UTC 2011
On 01/31/2011 03:35 PM, Derek Smythe wrote:
> I pointed this out previously, nobody cared to comment.
> What do we call it when registrars and resellers abuse the trust put
> in them, allowing parties to register anonymously knowing full well -
> even encouraging a certain segment of the domain owner market that
> targets innocent parties on the net via malware/spam/fraud, yet hide
> the existence of non-existing real end user details behind layers of
> laywers in disprate jurisdictions, deliberately so as to frustrate law
> enforcement that may wish to follow due process on behalf of the
> defrauded victims (who we also supposed to be represented here)
Who imposed a duty of trust on registrars and resellers? What right -
and I want chapter and verse, a full legal citation - gives that who the
authority to impose those duties?
If you want to pass a law imposing duties, then go for it. Such duties
exist merely by assertion.
As for "deliberately so as to frustrate law enforcement" - an act that
is lawful - and and registering a domain name using an hard-to-penetrate
intermediary (such as a corporation) is a lawful act.
And last time I checked there is nothing in the US Constitution - and I
am not aware of any such provision in other constitutions - that says
that citizens exist for the benefit of the government or must conform
their lawful activities for the convenience of law enforcement.
Closing one's windows at night also is a deliberate act that would
frustrate a police officer who is looking for burglers. So I guess that
when I draw my blinds at night that I ought to be treated as a criminal?
Attorney-client privilege also frustrates law enforcement. Should we
abandon that privilege?
Let me suggest that everyone here go out and read "The Oxbow Incident"
and consider the dangers of making accusations and executing judgment
without affording due process.
More information about the At-Large