> Il 27 marzo 2017 alle 0.22 "Rob McEwen, invaluement.com" > <r...@invaluement.com> ha scritto: > > > John Levine said: > "The problem is that the pro-crime crowd keep demanding that all the rest be > anonymous or effectively anonymous, too." > > Exactly! > > Also, like some who are arguing against Neil Sw. on this, I too consider > myself to be a very strong privacy advocate too. However what we currently > have is ALREADY "the compromise" between privacy and accountability. Already > , anyone who desires can have a private hidden Whois registration.
Hello, I'd have preferred another topic for my first message to this list, which I follow for other reasons, but having being involved in the Whois brawl for the last 15 years, I really feel the need to make the "European" point of view clearer. In Europe, privacy for *individuals* is a human right recognized by law since 1996. (Actually, it's recognized as well in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the European privacy model is now adopted in over 120 countries, so it's really the U.S. being the exception on this.) This means that in Europe paying someone else to appear in my place and hide my identity is not an acceptable solution, nor a law-compliant solution; I have the right to hide my identity for free, as part of the core product; and the registrar and registry have a legal obligation to allow me to do so. However, this does not help crime in any way (believe me, it's twenty years we do this in Europe and we don't have bands of criminals taking over our countries, except for some politicians maybe) because this affects the publishing of the information, not its collection. So I am still required to provide my data, that can still be required to be true (actually, I'd be much more likely to provide valid personal information if I'd be sure that it will not be put out there for everyone to grab), and the law enforcement authorities can still go to the registrar and get all my information. Of course, the same does not apply to other people willing to police the world on their own, but this is actually a good thing, since we do not believe in self-appointed crime fighters; but they could still get access if they act in cooperation with public law enforcement agencies, that could check their reasons and their methods, so this is not an issue as well. All of this only affects individuals; in Europe there is no concept of privacy for businesses or other organizations, even non-profit, and no one ever asked for it, though, of course, privacy applies to the personal information of the individuals representing a business. However, many people in Europe are quite pissed off by the fact that for almost twenty years ICANN and part of the Internet crowd refused to let European registrants, registrars and registries abide by our own laws, which is, basically, a protracted and willful insult to our sovereignty. Up to now, enforcement has been withdrawn as a sign of good will, but in one year from now the new European regulation on privacy comes into force, giving to the central EU data protection supervisor the authority to act on his own. He was at the last ICANN meeting in Copenhagen, where he stated that definitely there will then be a test case in which one European registrar, and perhaps ICANN as well, will be brought to trial over Whois. All in all, I think that lots of people are being unreasonable and only try to impose their viewpoint to everyone else. Maybe mailbombing working groups and shouting louder than everybody else is the way to deal with problems in some parts of the world, but I do not find it very useful. So it would be better to approach the issue with reciprocal understanding, and definitely I would not want to facilitate phishing or other crimes and I would be happy to find ways to avoid it, while still protecting the rights of individual registrants. However, we should start from the point that, though the Internet is global and immaterial, its industry is still subject to the laws and customs of each company's place of business, which ICANN does not have the authority to rewrite. Regards, -- kind regards, Vittorio Bertola Research & Innovation Engineer Cell:+39 348 7015022Skype:in-skype...@bertola.eu Email:vittorio.bert...@open-xchange.com Twitter: @openexchange - Facebook: OpenXchange - Web: www.open-xchange.com Open-Xchange AG, Rollnerstr. 14, 90408 Nuremberg, District Court Nuremberg HRB 24738 Managing Board: Rafael Laguna de la Vera, Carsten Dirks, Uwe Reumuth Chairman of the Board: Richard Seibt European Office: Open-Xchange GmbH, Olper Huette 5f, D-57462 Olpe, Germany, District Court Siegen, HRB 8718 Managing Directors: Frank Hoberg, Martin Kauss US Office: Open-Xchange. Inc., 530 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301, USA Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments from your system. _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
