Re: [ga] Get out of my name space. A review of IP property concerns on Domain Names ect...

[Leah G <jandl@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jeff Williams wrote:
<big snip>
> > > > Is there a way to place an auto filter from all things which would
> > > > emenate from anyone they would then sell my registration info to?
> >
> > How would you automate it when you have no idea to whom the information
> > is being disseminated?
>
>
>   Good question.  However if the Domain name owner, the registrar,
> the registry and especially ICANN were held responsible as they
> really should be, such gleaning of personal information in this way
> would be severally decreased...

That still doesn't address the automation issue.  It would simply
decrease the number of lists sold or by choice.  You can't automate
something you can't control, such as who might have gathered your
information.  Further, how can you hold a domain name holder responsible
for others gathering information?  I don't see how this computes at all.

>
<snip>
> > > ICANN/ICANN't is supposed to be the regulator.
> >
> > Are they?  Registration of domain names in the context here is part of a
> > business model.  Aside from the proscribed so-called sunrise provisions,
> > shared registratrion software requirements, whois and other technical
> > aspects, ICANN should not be regulating the business of domain
> > registration unless that process interferes with the core operation of
> > the internet itself (which sitefinder does).  The gathering of
> > information and using it for other purposes "should" perhaps be part of
> > the contractual relationship with ICANN, but ICANN should not involve
> > itself with consumer questions.
>
>
>   I agree with this thought to a point and disagree as well.  I agree
> that ICANN should not try to set business models, which the do
> currently anyway with registries and registrars agreements and
> new TLD's...  However as a public trust servant, they must involve
> themselves to a degree with consumer questions...

No.  ICANN must take into consideration issues that impact the public in
general, but from a technical rather than a political or business
aspect.  Consumer issues are not "public issues" in the wider sense of
the term.  Consumer issues are handled by the legal system and are part
of a business relationship, not a technical operational issue.

> > Spam, for instance, is not an area where ICANN should be regulating.
>
>
>   Agreed as I have said many times before.  But the can take measures
> to address or limit spam, which as an organization, they don't...

How?  Spam is a layer on top of the core.  It is a business and consumer
issue and should be addressed outside of ICANN.

> > It
> > cannot do anything to stem the flow of mail, website activity or
> > anything above the core layer.  Furthermore, it has no mandate to
> > interfere with the upper layers that operate on top of the core
> > protocols.  Spam is content management.  That should be regulated by
> > others, perhaps governments, perhaps not.  However, it is the backbone
> > providers, ISPs and network management that must work in concert to stop
> > spam.
>
>
> ISPs and network management entities cannot carry all or even the
> majority of the load...

If they are working together, which many are, to construct methods to
reduce its impact the best results will come from that effort.  Tar pits
or honey pots will most likely be a major project.  Also banding
together to educate mail server operators on security and anti-spam
methods as well as educating users is going to be one of the most
effective means to controlling spam.  Couple that with cooperative
efforts by governments to punish spammers and the results will be much
better than hoping for organizations like ICANN will come up with
anything workable or acceptable to those who are most impacted.

It is the entities who are impacted who will provide the best answers.
They are the ones bearing the cost of the traffic and customer service
issues, so it is in their best interests to work on the solution.

> > Goverments can certainly take a stand and make it painful for prolific
> > spammers to stay in business.
>
>
>   Yes they can, but they will not do so...

They are beginning to do so.

<snip>

> > As for sites tracking you and either
> > sharing or selling that information, aggregate or not, I have to wonder
> > whether that should be regulated.  The problem is that governments have
> > a propensity for creating overly broad regulations that end up harming
> > not only consumers, but small business as well.  DMCA is typcial of
> > that.  So is ACPA.  DMCA will end up stifling entire industries and
> > criminalizing average consumers exercising their basic rights.
>
>
>   Surrogate orgs such as DCMA and ACPA almost always eventually
> get over zealous if acting as a regulator...  ICANN has done so in some
> areas as you know...

Where did you come up with that one?  DMCA and ACPA are laws, not orgs.
 Forgive the tranposition of DMCA.

<snip>

--
Leah G.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/atlargeorg
http://forums.delphiforums.com/domainwatch