Hello, --- "wxWeb.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Saturday, May 18, 2002, 2:12:55 PM, Robert L Mathews wrote: > > Domain owners should be able to feel that any information they > provide > > will not be released to others unless it's necessary for the > operation of > > the domain or for legal reasons. Period. > > Why should they feel that way? > > They do not have that assurance when they purchase real estate. All > property ownership information is available publicly, without > exception. In fact, much like whois, they have to make it available > in bulk format (for a fee). There are even companies who specialize > in storing all of the information from particular states and > nationwide, and making it available for searches (including searching > for all property owned by a particular name).
<snip> > Privacy is not just a right, it is a responsibility as well. If > registrants are concerned about personal privacy, then, like in > personal property ownership, they can go to lengths to protect their > privacy. For a domain name, an agency service like the one Hugh I agree. I've cc'd Dan Halloran of ICANN, as I'd be curious to know how ICANN interpets "Postal Address" in the context of their advisory at: http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-10may02.htm If reading that announcement, one takes the section: "and is responsible for providing its own full contact information and for providing and updating accurate technical and administrative contact information adequate to facilitate timely resolution of any problems that arise in connection with the Registered Name" it is consistent with my own thoughts on the subject, previously expressed at: http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc10/msg00399.html that a necessary (and perhaps sufficient) amount of disclosure is that there be enough information available to legally serve someone with a process (i.e. "timely resolution" might be consistent with the premise of being able to be legally served a process). Here's a hypothetical example of an admin contact: Services, Elephant [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 12345 Beverly Hills, CA 90210-12345 US (415) 555-1234 <<-- assume this is a real number Is a P.O. Box Number, with no physical address considered a valid postal address given the aims and objectives of the public WHOIS, either by ICANN or the various bills floating around the U.S. Congress? I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think that a P.O. Box Number can be "served" a legal process, at least not in a timely manner. The mail may or may not arrive at the target person, if they pick up their mail from the P.O. Box. However, a process server couldn't verify that via personal service, etc. To that extent, the goal of "timely resolution" is not met. This might be a case where ICANN should make its advisory more clear, as to what exactly constitutes a valid Postal Address to help law enforcement, consumers, and other legitimate users of the WHOIS information. Sincerely, George Kirikos http://www.kirikos.com/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com
