<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Whois/Privacy
- To: GA <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [ga] Whois/Privacy
- From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2007 17:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=dFQpt0+8QBM6CECOfPFxrVc3uVcrN85zKObYuRQIdgVEvXNhCx9wvpCChEh33or//ISS0KR5BDbgPwX/fNMoZ/2CPTNHJ0EgJ0EJTl5tXVYSvwuIeHnPR8Y9PSg7aygGyoquUXDlO4nGGl85Zpzw6kgjqhPBjkw8Lz2CgcJZi64= ;
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I believe I prefer a couple of layers of red tape prior to allowing Whois data out to the general public. I do not think the IP interests can present a strong enough case to keep it the way it is. We have gone way to far into the transparency side of the issue. Nowhere is this type of personal data laid out like this anymore. In the newest medium we have the most archaic protections of privacy, It is out of balance.
A person or entity should have to make a formal request for the data, spelling out just as much personal information as that being sought and provide a reason for the request in recordable form for later use. It should also be done on a 1-1 basis, no bulk or multiple requests. That is it, no more or less complicated.
This allows the IP interests the ability to locate with only a modicum of delay. Certainly cost is not an issue, except maybe to a registry. (this might actually give credence to the need of a price hike, something heretofore missing.)
Eric
---------------------------------
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|