Friday, May 17, 2002, 8:03:10 PM, Derek J. Balling wrote:
> What if you (random individual, not you at the registrar) > needed/wanted to serve legal documents to someone who'd thrown the > street address of Wrigley Field on their whois data? The whois doesn't exist to serve as a database for where to serve process to. >>Also, there is an overhead in pursuing these matters. While we are happy >>to pursue reports where there are supporting circumstances for a >>challenge, we are cautious about the usefulness and cost of mass >>challenges for no other reason than bad contact data. > Wait... isn't it the registrar's responsibility, when confronted with > a domain-registration with bad data, to do just that? Not in my opinion. I've debate this issue already on another list whether the requirement requires any registrar to do anything with mass submitted data, unless there is a pressing reason to do so, such as a lawsuit against the registrant, etc. >>Furthermore, unintentional bad contact data (as you must be aware) is the >>hidden bane of our industry. > Agreed. But unintentional bad contact data is easily corrected by the > folks who have the bad data (e.g., if example.tld is given to you as > having bad phone number, and they've got a number that was in an > area-code split, contacting the registrant and saying "hey, why not > get this updated to be accurate" shouldn't be too much to ask.) Again, priority would/should be given if there is a PRESSING need for that data to be corrected. I don't see "obviously false" as a pressing need justifying the kind of man power that this would require. Accepting mass reports without any other basis as you suggest a registrar should would drive the costs up so high that domains would become as pricey as SSL Certs are currently. >> It is rampant and common. Promoting an >>environment where challenges are put forward regularly without supporting >>circumstances would not serve many many registrants. > What do you define as "supporting circumstances"? The registrant > agreement puts the burden of "keeping the data accurate" on the > registrant. It puts the burden of enforcing that policy on the > registrar. If it is brought to the registrar's attention that the > data is inaccurate -- in violation of said agreement -- what other > "supporting circumstances" are needed? A reason why the complainer needs the information updated, such as a pending lawsuit, etc. <intentionally obtuse analogies snipped> (They aren't worthy of response, analogies usually suck, and in this case even more so) >> Finally, as a challenger, I have no problem with a deposit >>requirement to support my claim, provided I get it back if my claim is >>proven to be valid. > That's just crazy to me. Why should I have to put up coin to get a > registrar to their job? That's what the registrar signed on for. Because it ISN'T a registrars job. -- Best regards, William X Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- OpenSRS installation and customizations Payment Processing Integration Apache Installation and Support Services http://www.wxsoft.com/
