Re: [registrars] Congressional Hearing
On 2/13/2004 12:07 PM Rick Wesson noted that: Your privacy argument mearly pushes the responsibility for determining accuracy on law-enforcement.
Rick - your arguement is equally spurious as it assumes that a) registrars have existing responsibilities to guaranteeing data accuracy and b) that increasing this invented onus is the best way to solve the problem. This is patently ridiculous and terribly self-interested. The existing system of monitoring and enforcement, which has the benefit of being continually improved, has much to commend it. I did not get into business to babysit registrants. Either they can provide us with accurate data or they cannot. Those that are unable to live up to their contractual agreement should have those contracts revoked. It need not be more complex than that. --
Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org begin:vcard fn:Ross Rader n:Rader;Ross org:Tucows Inc.;Innovation & Research adr:;;96 Mowat;Toronto;ON;M9C 4J4;Canada email;internet:ross@xxxxxxxxxx title:Director tel;work:(416) 538-5492 tel;fax:(416) 531-1257 tel;cell:(416) 828-8783 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.byte.org version:2.1 end:vcard
|