[AusNOG] ICANN to bring an end to TLD privacy?

[Mark Foster]

Being identifiable as the owner of a domain name also helps create a level of responsibility and accountability for the actions of the people using it. I'd wager that is far more important than protecting the privacy of a domain owner - when facts like the name of a company director/owner and the details of registered incorporated societies (etc) are also in the public record, the requirement for a domain to be registered to a legally identifiable entity is a "nothing" issue. Better for domain owners to be able to recognise that particular type of fraud for what it is, than use that as an excuse to permit the kind of noise routinely attributed to anonymous services online ?

-- 
Mark.

Sent from a mobile device.

> On 25/06/2015, at 18:20, Shane Short <shane at short.id.au> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Given the constant amount of crap I get to any of the domain listed on my domain/apnic whois e-mails, I'd tend to disagree (We have specific e-mails for those, so we can tell exactly what's coming in).
> But that's not what this is about-- this is yet another case of rights holders trying to skirt the law and collect a person's information without any legal due process so they can continue doing speculative  invoicing.
> 
> I agree with Brad here, I'm happy for the registrar to have my information and I'd be happy for them to give out that information if there is a lawful request for it-- but I don't see why it has to be publicly splashed all over whois.
> 
> -Shane
> 
> 
> Mark ZZZ Smith wrote:
>> While I understand the desire for privacy, I'm not sure it is as much of an issue in this case as people might think it is.
>> 
>> I've had a number of domain names registered to me with this email address, my mobile number and my PO BOX(es) since 2002.
>> 
>> I do receive quite a lot of spam to this email address, but then again I've been using it quite publicly for many years, including on a number of public mailing lists and in open source code that also gets published on web pages. So I can't attribute spam I've received specifically to my domains' whois information.
>> 
>> I haven't had any issues with having my mobile number listed, and I've had the same mobile number since 1995. On very rare occasions I've received SMS spam, however I couldn't attribute that to my whois details. Neither have I had any issues listing my PO BOX - I can only think of a few pieces of mail I've received over the years that I definitely could attribute to being sent because of my whois information. I would recommend a PO BOX to hide where you actually live though, if you're going to publish your mailing address publicly (as I have done in a number of Internet Drafts).
>> 
>> It is my understanding that the existing "privacy" service that registrars offer is achieved by them actually registering the domain name in their name, and then letting you use it i.e., it isn't actually your domain name, it is theirs. I think I read a while ago about a dispute between a customer and a registrar, where the registrar was in the wrong, but they wouldn't let the customer have the domain and the customer couldn't get the domain because it wasn't actually registered in their name. 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Mark.
>> 
>> From: Brad Peczka <brad at bradpeczka.com>
>> To: "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net" <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net> 
>> Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2015, 15:39
>> Subject: [AusNOG] ICANN to bring an end to TLD privacy?
>> 
>> At the behest of organisations such as MarkMonitor, ICANN is considering a policy change whereby domain holders with sites associated to "commercial activity" will no longer be able to protect their private information with WHOIS protection services. 
>> 
>> The text of the proposal can be found on ICANN's website at https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-initial-05may15-en.pdf
>> 
>> Something worth noting is that the definition of 'Commercial Activity' appears to be quite wide, and will likely encompass a number of sole/small traders who operate under their own name, rather than a business. I personally feel that the auDA approach hits the happy medium - protecting a large amount of information from being publicly accessible, while still being able to see what entity is in control of a domain name.
>> 
>> If you're interested in commenting, the close date for submissions is 7th July... so get typing!
>> 
>> Regards,
>> -Brad.
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150625/4cfe02cf/attachment.html>