[registrars] Whois Article in todays Wall Street Journal

[Marcus Faure]

Hi,

this will always be an unresolvable conflict. The IP people will ask
for more data while the privacy people will want less data. It is my
impression that North America is more worried about IP while Europe is
more worried about privacy..

Marcus


> Thought I would pass this along to the RC
>  
> Jeff
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
> Should Owners
> Of Web Sites
> Be Anonymous?
> 
> By WILLIAM M. BULKELEY
> April 27, 2006; Page B1
> 
> 
> Last fall, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the American Red Cross used an Internet database called "Whois" that lists names and numbers of Web-site owners to shut down dozens of unauthorized Web sites that were soliciting money under the Red Cross logo.
> 
> Online marketplace eBay <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=ebay>  Inc. says its investigators use Whois hundreds of times a day to pursue scamsters. Insurance giant Transamerica recently used Whois to trace the owner of a Web site purportedly in the Middle East but actually U.S.-based -- that was selling insurance by infringing on the Transamerica trademark.
> 
> But if proposed rule changes are adopted by the organization that runs the Internet, corporate and government investigators won't be able to rely on Whois to find the owners of fraudulent Web sites.
> 
> Whois is regulated by the Internet Corp. for Assigned Names and Numbers, usually called Icann, a nongovernmental organization based in Marina del Rey, Calif., that handles many vital Internet issues. Under Icann's current regulations, anyone who gets a Web site is supposed to list a name, phone number and address in Whois of a contact person to resolve both technical problems with a site and administrative issues.
> 
> Earlier this month, at the urging of privacy advocates and over the opposition of major corporations, the Icann committee responsible for Whois voted 18-9 to restrict its listings solely to someone who can resolve technical "configuration" problems. That means a Web-hosting company could be listed without any link to the person who controls what appears on the site. After the committee makes recommendations on other aspects of the Whois rules, the full Icann board is expected to approve the reduced disclosure requirement.
> 
> The dispute partly reflects the growth of the Internet from a communications network used by scientists and academics into a global river of commerce. The requirement for a name, phone number and street address came years before identity theft became a mainstream concern. Advocates of reduced information say that the original purpose was to make sure someone was available to fix Web-site problems that were interfering with the broader network, and the changes are consistent with the original goals of the Internet of permitting free-wheeling communications.
> 
> Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group based in Washington, said "for privacy, this is a very good result," because bloggers and other individuals who operate their own Web sites will no longer need to fear stalkers or threats of lawsuits.
> 
> However, law-enforcement agencies around the world and companies such as Microsoft <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=msft>  Corp., Sony <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=sne>  Corp., Walt Disney <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=dis>  Co. and Time-Warner <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=CHTR>  Inc. are criticizing the plan because they say they need the information now in Whois to combat financial fraud and trademark violation. With only the identity of a technical person, they say investigators won't be able to find a site's owner without filing a lawsuit and getting a subpoena.
> 
> Many corporate representatives had hoped the committee would force more accurate disclosure in Whois. Bruce A. MacDonald, a trademark lawyer with Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis in Washington, says lack of enforcement of current Whois regulations is "scandalous" because it lets "fictitious entities and anonymous persons" register domain names. Removing the requirement entirely, he says, will "result in a complete loss of the ability" for companies to track down people misusing corporate trademarks.
> 
> Although the U.S. government has only an advisory role with Icann, it has indicated it wants more disclosure rather than less, according to one member of a task force working on the issue for Icann. A spokesman for the commerce department says it hasn't submitted a formal statement.
> 
> The decision to reduce information in Whois "shows that Icann isn't under the control of trademark interests and the U.S. government," says Milton Mueller, a Syracuse University professor and privacy advocate who has been following the issue. However, he says, "there's still a danger that the U.S. government will try to circumvent this." He noted that last fall, the Icann names committee proposed establishing a domain name extension -- ".xxx" -- designed for pornographic Web sites, but the U.S. government has persuaded Icann to postpone approving the plan.
> 
> Mr. Rotenberg says the U.S. government is in a delicate political position, because it wants the U.S.-based Icann to run the Internet rather than having it taken over by the United Nations as some governments have proposed. Therefore, it is important for Icann to function as an independent body even if it sometimes goes against U.S. policy. Some privacy advocates say Whois may violate tighter data-privacy rules in Canada and Europe by publishing personal information of Web sites based there, but the matter has yet to be adjudicated.
> 
> Icann declined to make officials available to discuss Whois.
> 
> The committee vote represented the interests not only of privacy advocates but of companies called registrars. They contract with Icann to sell people uniquely named Web sites and often host the Web sites on their own computers. A number of companies, like Godaddy.com of Phoenix, Ariz., and Register.com, New York, have made being a registrar a major business. Icann gets most of its annual budget from the registrars who pay it certain fees plus 25 cents a year for each domain name registered. The registrars expect that less disclosure would spawn more Web sites.
> 
> Bloggers played a major role in the dispute, seeking to guard their privacy. One anonymous blogger wrote in an email to the committee that providing contact information publicly "is a way of setting [bloggers] up for identify theft, stalking, stupid lawsuits, and the fear of never knowing when some net kook is going to show up on one's doorstep." Tongue in cheek, he suggested that Icann order corporations with Web sites to list the home addresses and phone numbers of their executives and attorneys.
> 
>