ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[whois-laws-comments]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index    

whois policy

  • To: <whois-laws-comments@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: whois policy
  • From: "Russ Smith" <russ@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:10:53 -0500

Hi,

 

The first problem with this committee is that everyone is too scared to
question the basic reasons behind the whois database to begin with.  It
started out as a database so techies could contact each other.  Since then
the reasons for having a whois database have changed drastically but the
policy is still based on the pre-commercialization days of the Internet.
Until the basic reasons are addressed as to why there should a whois and
what should be in it these patchwork committees will never get very far and
often create conflicts in other areas.

 

It is my understanding the whois policy conflicts with US laws.  Namely the
whois databases are, when the records involve an individual who is a US
citizen, covered under the Freedom of Information Act.  There were several
complaints to the National Science Foundation in the 1990's about this issue
but they sidestepped the complaints, gave evasive responses, and never fully
addressed the issue.  Since then the program has moved to the US Department
of Commerce NTIA who, through a series of agreements and contracts, still
requires these records to be maintained and made publicly available.
Therefore, until the DOC properly characterizes whois as a System of Records
and publishes a notice in the Federal Register all US registrars should be
exempt.

 

I would also point out that any policy has to be consistent with the UDRP.
As you can see from

 

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-0975.html

 

the UDRP is not coordinated with whois "privacy" services being offered.  In
this case it is the registrar who is acting as the proxy but that is not set
either.  Suppose I own a bunch of domains I can list the owner as "Joe's
privacy proxy."  If a UDRP complaint is files it goes to "Joe's privacy
proxy."    Then Joe could sit there, review the complaint, talk to some
lawyers, and then . after all the facts are reviewed . bring in the "real"
owner of the domain.  

 

Unfortunately, given's ICANN previous responses to public comments and their
bad reputation, I am sure this posting is a waste of time.

 

Russ Smith

 

 

 

 



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index    

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy