FC: Replies to Ben Edelman's report on "whois" database errors

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Tue May 14 2002 - 06:33:10 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Jamie Love on DMCA hoedown, party on Capitol Hill this Thursday"

    Previous Politech message:
    
    "Ben Edelman's report on intentional errors in 'whois' database"
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-03520.html
    
    ---
    
    Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 04:26:22 -0400
    To: politechat_private
    From: "Robert L. Ellis" <rellis@internet-attorneys.com>
    Subject: Fwd: FC: Ben Edelman's report on intentional errors in "whois" 
    database
    
    Declan,
    
    Ben has performed a valuable service in his studies on domain name
    misinformation and unrelated-content misdirection, so I hate to
    nitpick.  But since part of this discussion is about draft legislation that
    claims to address the problem (HR-4640) we should try to be accurate about
    legal terminology.
    
    In his case study of NicGod, Ben refers to registrants who "intentionally
    provide systematically inaccurate contact information to registrars for
    inclusion in the WHOIS database," and writes that "[s]uch fraud can include
    the entry of invalid street addresses and phone numbers . . . ."
    
    Entering such misinformation may be repugnant, but it is not
    fraud.  Nothing in Ben's study that I could find documented any cases of
    fraud arising out of the false information given to the
    registrars.  Indeed, Ben does not accuse these folks of doing anything
    illegal as far as I can tell.
    
    A similar misunderstanding seems to characterize discussions of
    HR-4640.  Contrary to reports, that bill would NOT criminalize the practice
    of entering false domain registration information.  Providing false or
    misleading information to a registrar would be a crime ONLY if  done "with
    intent to defraud."   The "intent" provision renders the bill more or less
    useless (and I predict it will die in committee), since "intent to defraud"
    would be virtually impossible to prove.  The "intent" of the NicGod people
    and their ilk is probably not to defraud, but rather to protect their
    anonymity while engaging in their (currently legal) bottom-feeding activity.
    
    In any event, criminal penalties seem rather extreme.  Wouldn't it be
    easier simply to provide that the domain name would be forfeited?
    
    And for that matter, as long as the WHOIS database is a public record and
    can be exploited by spammers and con artists, why should it be wrong to
    enter false information?  Why not simply enter all false information except
    for email contact, register for five years, change the email contact to a
    fake one, and then just before renewal time change it back?  (Assuming one
    is willing to risk losing the domain via a UDRP.)  It's no different than
    an unlisted number.  If spammers and con artists are willing to engage in
    guerilla tactics, why not the rest of us?
    
    - Bob Ellis
    
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Ellis Venable & Busam
    A Partnership of Professional Organizations
    33 North High Street, Columbus, OH 43215-3076
    +1 614.221.2422 phone   221.5244 fax
    www.internet-attorneys.com
    
    ---
    
    From: adminat_private (admin)
    To: <edelmanat_private>
    Cc: <declanat_private>, <infoat_private>, <brewsterat_private>
    Subject: FW: Ben Edelman's report on intentional errors in "whois" database
    Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 08:04:30 -0400
    
    And so who gave Archive.org (Owned by Amazon.com) permission to
    reproduce all the web pages?  .... Or doesn't the DMCA apply to
    companies like Amazon?
    
    Russ Smith
    
    ---
    
    From: "D McOwen" <dmcowenat_private>
    To: <declanat_private>
    Cc: <edelmanat_private>
    Subject: RE: Ben Edelman's report on intentional errors in "whois" database
    Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 07:24:39 -0400
    
    Hi Declan, Mr Edelman,
    
    The main question I have had since this obviously fraudulent cottage
    Industry has flourished is "whois" backing and funding all of the money to
    buy and hold all these ASCII characters for ransom?
    It is also obviously infinitely deep pockets, anyone guess as to how much
    money has been thrown in to kidnap the Internet?
    
    It is sobering to finally see that maybe the focus of leaders is starting to
    shift from going after benign and for the good computer technology to the
    actual "criminal" element out there preying on the benefits of the Internet
    and computers.
    
    Dave McOwen
    http://www.freemcowen.com
    
    ---
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sign this pro-therapeutic cloning petition: http://www.franklinsociety.org
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue May 14 2002 - 06:49:51 PDT