Re: [ga] Whois more in detail

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

1st year law student stuff there Hugh. Applies to warranties, not scammers who steal credit card info through their websites, then charge small amounts they hope no one will notice from their bank accounts, then if they do notice the amounts are not large enough for them to get a lawyer and sue. it's widespread Hugh. Wish you thought consumer protection was important.

If you asked non-domain owners which was more important, allowing domain owners to hide their whois information or having to make it public so that they could easily check who they were doing business with, do you really believe the average user would vote for hiding the whois info? Applying this to only domain owners who ask for credit card info or other personal info once again so you don't get it confused.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
http://www.articlecontentprovider.com

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Hugh Dierker 
  To: kidsearch ; Jeff Williams ; Dominik Filipp 
  Cc: ga ; icann board address 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 9:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [ga] Whois more in detail


  Caveat Emptor

  kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
    I guess I shouldn't be surprised here. Hugh, consumer protection is not an invasion of privacy. If a company does not wish to disclose who they are, then they should not be allowed to ask for people's credit cards. Which part of that is difficult to comprehend?

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Hugh Dierker 
      To: Jeff Williams ; Dominik Filipp 
      Cc: ga ; icann board address 
      Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:46 PM
      Subject: Re: [ga] Whois more in detail


      I have not looked up the definition of Anarchy recently, but it seems to me that absence of laws is not a requirement. Anarchy is when there is no enforcement of laws. Of course voluntary compliance is self enforcement.
      So we do not face an anarchy situation here, we worry over those who would break the laws in order to cheat others. Common law has both tort and criminal actions and remedies for such conduct, assuming injury.
      If someone says something and you have a right to rely upon it, and you do and it is false and it harms you, you have many remedies already. Just because it is an issue involving the internet does not mean we throw thousands of years of jurisprudence out the window.

      A lock stops an honest man, not a thief.

      e


      Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
        Dominik and all,

        Some questions needing answers and incorporation into any
        Whois policy might and/or should be:

        How is any model going to be enforced? Whom is responsible for
        enforcement? What are the means by which enforcement is effected?
        What, if any are the penalties for infractions/multiple infractions? To
        whom and how are infractions reported?

        It is and has been clear that ICANN cannot or will not enforce
        upon itself it's own bylaws, ect. It is also clear that Registries cannot
        or will not follow and comply with their own contracts and/or policies.
        It is also very clear that registrars cannot or will not follow and comply
        with their own contracts and/or policies.

        So whom or what is to be the Whois enforcement entity?
        Do we have another of many Chickens and eggs?

        Dominik Filipp wrote:

        > Absolutely, Chris. In my opinion, reporting whois-noncompliant links is
        > an essential part of the whois policy. This question will come forth
        > anyway regardless of the whois model eventually chosen.
        >
        > Dominik
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: kidsearch [mailto:kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
        > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 6:51 PM
        > To: Dominik Filipp; ga
        > Subject: Re: [ga] Whois more in detail
        >
        > I see that as completely doable Dominik and appreciate the time you
        > spent on that. One question is would it be enforceable? I mean say I
        > registered a domain nameand said i was a nonprofit or noncomm, but then
        > built a commercial website anyway. There could be a link in the whois,
        > "report this website as noncompliant with whois rules" where users can
        > report that it is a commercial website and not a noncomm.
        >
        > Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
        > http://www.articlecontentprovider.com
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Dominik Filipp" 
        > To: "ga" 
        > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:49 AM
        > Subject: [ga] Whois more in detail

        Regards,

        --
        Jeffrey A. Williams
        Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
        "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
        Abraham Lincoln

        "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
        very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

        "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
        liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
        P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
        United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
        ===============================================================
        Updated 1/26/04
        CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
        IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
        ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
        E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Registered Email addr with the USPS
        Contact Number: 214-244-4827





      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
      http://mail.yahoo.com 


  __________________________________________________
  Do You Yahoo!?
  Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
  http://mail.yahoo.com