[At-Large] Issue Report on Thick Whois
cw at christopherwilkinson.eu
Tue Nov 22 16:17:24 UTC 2011
I must say that I am inclined towards Evan's point of view.
The "thick" Whois model was initially developed to correct the
mistakes of the NSI/VSGN era.
It is still valid. It is used for most gTLDs and for ccTLDs.
I am not convinced that it is time to change.
I shall read other contributions to this thread with interest.
On 22 Nov 2011, at 16:38, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> On 22 November 2011 03:25, Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz at iks-jena.de> wrote:
>> In iks.lists.icann.at-large, you wrote:
>>> I have not yet reviewed the document in sufficient depth to say
>>> whether I feel that it is complete, but on an initial review, it
>>> looks fine. My personal belief is that the ALAC should strongly
>>> support the initiation of a PDP on this issue.
>> I'd strongly suggest to move to thin WHOIS approaches whererver
>> Thick WHOIS services requires privacy violations as well as
>> violations of
>> various local laws by transfering personal data outside of the
>> of the domain name holder.
> I disagree strongly.
> Thin WHOIS allows domain owners to hide from people who may have been
> harmed by actions on their site(s).
> Internet domains are, by their nature, public instruments to be used
> help people find Internet content. This is one area in which
> privacy, by
> and large is the realm of people hiding from (what I believe to be)
> legitimate investigation. I do not believe that, in this case, the
> should be denied information available to law enforcement.
> I would remind that At-Large is charged with protecting the
> interests of
> Internet end users, not registrants. Registrants have an interest in
> able to hide. End users have an interest in domain owner
> accountability and
> I favour thick WHOIS.
> - Evan
> 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