Re: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Dangers and risks of thick Whois

[Bob Bruen <bruen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Avri,

I am not speaking for Evan (or anyone but myself).

Your first point jumps way off to the extreme. People do not need to forgo 
getting a domain name to keep their privacy, but they do have to do a 
little extra in world where everything is pretty open (in spite of the 
EU :).
As to your second point, we are not moving from thin to thick, but rather 
we are moving back to thick, after some moved from thick to thin.
              --bob

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Avri Doria wrote:

> Evan,
>
> Is your point that if people want privacy then they should not get domain  
> names?
>
> I am sorry I was not at this morning's meeting. Will listen to call and 
> comment further.
> The main point is that moving from thin to thick changes the 
> jurisdiction under which existing registrant for old gTLD are governed. 
> Thus individuals, and associations of endangered individuals (the users 
> Evan refers to), would be forced to switch from an enlightened privacy 
> scheme such as exists in many european countries, especially e.g. the 
> Netherlands, to the relatively privacy free rules of the US.
> This is also the unfortunate situation that has been forced, without 
> benefit of a legitimate policy process, on all new gTLDs.
>
> avri
>
> On 29 Jan 2013, at 07:26, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
> > On 29 January 2013 07:45, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Apart from agreeing with Frédéric's response, I feel that online 
> > anonymity is in some circumstances an important measure that needs to 
> > be taken to avoid danger scenarios. It is true that almost all 
> > registrant information is publicly accessible despite registering 
> > domain names with registrars in countries/jurisdictions with data 
> > privacy laws. Being an Egyptian, I have a very personal perspective on 
> > the issue of online anonymity and feel that a policy for all existing 
> > and future gTLDs registries using "thick" Whois is a step backwards for 
> > practicing freedom of expression.
> > This raises a common implicit yet unchallenged assumption -- that there 
> > is a necessary link between freedom of speech and owning a domain name.
> > As someone who runs a site that hosts a number of anonymous bloggers -- 
> > none of whom requires their own domain name in order to protect their 
> > anonymity -- I am unconvinced of that assumed link. Furthermore, 
> > privacy is not synonymous with anonymity.
> > - Evan
--
Dr. Robert Bruen
Cold Rain Labs
http://coldrain.net/bruen
+1.802.579.6288