<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] RE: Whois more in detail
- To: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [ga] RE: Whois more in detail
- From: "Dominik Filipp" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:16:22 +0100
- Cc: "icann whois" <whois-comments@xxxxxxxxx>, "ga" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Acc1iESZgU55PcK9Sp+KgSZtzUIxYQACVPfg
- Thread-topic: Whois more in detail
Chris,
I have collected a list of pros and cons regarding the whois privacy
matter and have gotten this
* * *
a) Registrants tend to hide their identity data calling for keeping
individual and/or collective privacy right for variety of legitimate
reasons (personal safety, security, anti-spam protection, persecution,
abuse).
Amendment: PRIVACY
b) Suspected entities (spammers/scammers/speculators) call for the same
to hide their identity.
Amendment: DISCLOSURE
c) Companies harmed by copyright infringement or by other parties using
similar confusing domain name in bad faith call for disclosing as much
data as possible (the Red-Cross case).
Amendment: DISCLOSURE
d) Standard users want to access the data too in order to verify the
reliability of company before being charged via credit card, or before
initiating any sensitive negotiation/deal with the company.
Amendment: DISCLOSURE
e) Different national laws may impose different data privacy law
requirements (Dutch versus French models)
Amendment: NEUTRAL (cannot be influenced)
* * *
Just taken numerically its 3 : 1 in favour of disclosure, which is
geting me pretty surprised, particularly, now when I'm advocating the
privacy :-))).
I know this mechanical approach might seem ridiculous, but anyway...
What do you think? Frankly, I'm a bit puzzled...
Dominik
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|