[At-Large] privacy, was Impressions from the Whois-Review
Patrick Vande Walle
patrick at vande-walle.eu
Tue Feb 1 05:48:44 UTC 2011
On 31 Jan 2011, at 21:37, John R. Levine wrote:
> Does ICANN have any interest in the privacy of spam and phishing victims?
> The answer I'm hearing is no, because the rights of the handful of people
> who have paid ICANN to care, by registering a domain, are more important.
> Let me know if I've missed anything. For any arguments along the lines
> that nobody needs WHOIS to track down phishes and fake drugs, please
> explain why you need your vanity domain, and why your need is more
One thing we all agree on is that criminals need to be tracked. Of course, we need a record of who has registered domain names.
The fundamental question is who gets to see the full details of a registrant.
I am advocating that one should show sufficient authority to do so.
Please note that this does not apply only to what you consider "vanity domains". Under law over here, even the name of your employer is considered private information. One should never register a domain name for his/her employer if he want privacy.
More information about the At-Large