My own views, for what they're worth, are in a column here: http://news.com.com/Privacy+reduction's+next+act/2010-1028_3-5155054.html An excerpt: If you buy a domain name, current regulations created by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) say you must make public "accurate and reliable contact details and promptly correct and update them during the term of the...registration, including: the full name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and fax number." Who wants to make that kind of personal information public for the benefit of spammers, direct marketers and snoops? You shouldn't have to publish your home address--and other personal details--to everyone in the world just to own a domain name. And if you decide to lie by typing in "1 Nowhere Road," I don't see why you should be punished for attempting to protect your and your family's privacy. There are plenty of legitimate reasons why domain name holders might leave their address blank. [...] These rights to anonymity are enshrined in the Bill of Rights, both in the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech, and in the Ninth Amendment, which was intended to curb government's power. [...] -Declan -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] An open letter to PFIR on "Whois" privacy [priv] Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:59:35 -0400 To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> (please remove my name & contact information) Declan, I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Cross, but I don't think he realizes that one can remain pseudonymous today. I have approximately 37 domain name, 37 websites. Some political. While all the speech contained on those websites are protected under the First Amendment, for several of those web sites I choose to publish my contact information in a different way. First, I have a post office box. Two, actually. Both at different branches. When I registered the post-office box, I was asked to list the names of all others who would be using that box. The Technical, Administrative, and Billing Contacts list my pseudonym. The telephone & fax numbers go to a J2 Connect Voicemail/ Fax forwarding service. And the actual domains? They're registered to my initials. I still own the domain names for as long as my registrar receives payment from me, and payment is automatically billed to my CC. Now, were I to be involved in criminal activity, it would be extremely easy for The State to track me down. All they would have to do is subpoena the subscriber records from the registrar, web hosting provider, or J2. However, since I'm not engaged in any criminal activity -- I just don't want my boss or some nut-case out there disagreeing with me and getting my home address, or to find out who I am -- I'm not too terribly worried. And, since I'm not engaged in commerce through the mail, the USPS is prohibited from giving out my name if someone inquires. The USPS can, however, upon request, give the registered name (and street address!) out to anybody who inquires, for PO Boxes that are used for business & commercial purposes. Doing it this way also saves me from the scam that some registrars are proliferating by setting up "anonymous domain registrations". What a bunch of bull that racket is. But, of course, if domain registrations were allowed to be anonymous to begin with, it sure would save me some trouble. -- Another relatively unknown computer geek -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] An open letter to PFIR on "Whois" privacy [priv] Date: 24 Jun 2004 15:00:30 -0400 From: John R Levine <johnl@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <40DB138C.6040908@private> > [I invite PFIR to reply. --Declan] I've known Lauren Weinstein for almost 30 years, but he seems really out of touch on current Internet issues. As of yesteday, he still thinks there's a great ISP conspiracy to meter everythng. R's, John -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] An open letter to PFIR on "Whois" privacy [priv] Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 21:53:42 -0500 From: Jim Davidson <davidson@private> To: tom@private CC: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> Dear Tom, An excellent message. Please keep up the good work. I'm not bothering to copy > Mr Weinstien, Mr. Neumann, and Mr. Farber, who do not impress me as friends of liberty. > Anonymous Speech is a RIGHT, not a privilege. Anonymous speech is a freedom, and all attempts to restrict freedom invariably fail. More importantly, they always generate unintended consequences. > This point has been reaffirmed over and over again by > almost 230 years of American jurisprudence No doubt many people would say "everything is different now" and other simpering cowardly things, but I completely agree with your view. In fact, I was deeply dismayed and affirmed in my plans to leave the USA when the Supreme Court announced recently in the Hiibel case that identifying oneself to a police officer is mandatory. > We cannot relegate political speech on the Internet > to second class citizenship. Indeed, we cannot relate political speech or the use of the Internet to any class of citizenship. Being a citizen and having free speech are totally unrelated concepts. > The "extremely limited set of cases where domain holders might > demonstrate a clear public safety or other critical need that may > possibly justify masking of some WHOIS data" is the set of ALL > political websites on the Internet. Correct. And if IANA/ICANN and their ilk cannot see as much, then domain registrars will soon be joined by a bevy of identity providers who hold names for others in an agency capacity. Law firms, registered agents, and mailing address providers will quickly establish services so that domain owners are not exposed to abuse. > then these speakers will not hold domain names. I suspect that this objective is the real agenda of the fascists who would eliminate privacy and anonymity. It is not about free speech for them, it is about control. > You guys are barking up the wrong tree. Dogs often do. > You guys are standing along side corrupt interests. Yes, quite. Which is why I won't send my comments to them. Collaboration is vile. > These are not technical security and reliability issues. These are > content issues, and they should be dealt with through the legal system, > not through ICANN. I strongly urge you to carefully reconsider your > position on this matter. Yes, though, what are the odds? > Tom Cross > Just an ordinary unknown computer geek. You write very well and you are clearly well versed in the history of free speech and anonymity, so I suspect you of false modesty. <grin> Regards, Jim http://indomitus.net/ -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [Politech] An open letter to PFIR on "Whois" privacy [priv] Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 13:47:40 -0700 From: Clinton D. Fein <clinton.fein@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> What a well reasoned, sensible letter. The letter from Network Solutions below underscores exactly how respectful they are of privacy concerns. They now want a copy of my license or phone bill!!!!! In 2000, the United States subpoenaed records from me, requesting that I reveal the identity of the sender of an anonymous postcard that had been sent using Annoy.com's postcard service. Because of the government's flimsy reasoning, potential privacy violations in California and because of my own commitment to privacy, I fought to keep private the information of the user in question, ultimately being forced to appear before the Fifth Circuit to argue these very issues. Information pertaining to the domain name of the person in question was never even considered, since it was completely irrelevant and unhelpful in determining who the sender was, assuming, for very good reason, I planned on cooperating. As I told the court, (through my attorneys) even knowledge of an IP address identifying a specific machine does not conclusively reveal the identity of the user, since access to that single machine is not necessarily restricted to one person. It may be a computer in a public library for instance. Just this Monday, I received a letter from Network Solutions claiming that the user information associated with one of the URLs I own was invalid. Indeed, because of the cumbersome technology Network Solutions employs, I literally have to individually merge scores of different user names to be able to make a global change to an address associated with these multiple user IDs all attached to the same name anyway. In addition to requiring an unreasonable five day response (what if I was away and did not have access to this email, which had automatically been filed as junk mail anyway?), but I'm now required to fax (not email, fax) a form to their "Breach of Contract Department" in addition to a photocopy of a document (e.g., picture ID, phone bill, etc.) that reflects the accuracy of the current domain name record. Here is the email: From: Rabuck, Ricky [mailto:RRabuck@private] Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 10:15 AM To: Clinton D. Fein Subject: URL Deleted - Service Request Number Deleted Dear Customer, It has been brought to our attention that some or all of the information associated with your domain name is outdated or incorrect. These types of complaints are brought to our attention in one of two ways. The most common type of complaint is received from the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). ICANN is the non-profit corporation responsible for accrediting domain name registrars. ICANN requires domain name registration customers to keep their account information current. ICANN mandates that outdated contact information can be grounds for domain name cancellation. The second type of complaint is a direct report made to the registrar about a domain name registered by one of our customers. These complaints are typically brought to our attention when another party is interested in purchasing the domain name in question or they have received unsolicited e-mail from the domain. In order to prevent service interruptions or Web site outages, it is very important that you log into Account Manager and update your contact information. ICANN rules require us to delete a domain name once we have been notified of inaccurate WHOIS information. In order to update your WHOIS database information, please have your User ID and password ready and follow the instructions below: 1. Login to Account Manager. 2. Click "Edit Account Contacts" from the left-hand navigation. 3. Select "Click here" under Edit Whois contacts. 4. Select the domain(s) where the Whois contacts need to be updated, click "Continue". 5. Select which contact(s) are to be changed and click "continue". 6. Select who will replace your current contact. 7. Enter the appropriate information based on the selected replacement, click "Save". To prevent any interruption in service, please have this information updated within the next 5 business days. Once you have updated your WHOIS database information please verify this action with us by faxing to us a short letter stating that the information in the domain name record is accurate. For company registrants, the letter must be on company letterhead that reflects the accuracy of the current domain name record. For individual registrants, the letter must be accompanied by a photocopy of a document (e.g., picture ID, phone bill, etc.) that reflects the accuracy of the current domain name record. The letter must also contain the following statement: "On behalf of ____________________________________________ the registrant for the above-referenced domain name(s), I certify that all of the information listed in Network Solutions WHOIS database is current and accurate. Signature_______________________________________________ This documentation should be faxed to: 570-708-3077 ATTN: RICK RABUCK/ Breach of Contract Department If you have any questions regarding the ICANN policy, please see the following excerpt taken from the ICANN Registrar Agreement, or view the entire ICANN document through the link provided. 3.7.7.1 The Registered Name Holder shall provide to Registrar accurate and reliable contact details and promptly correct and update them during the term of the Registered Name registration, including: the full name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and fax number if available of the Registered Name Holder; name of authorized person for contact purposes in the case of an Registered Name Holder that is an organization, association, or corporation; and the data elements listed in Subsections 3.3.1.2, 3.3.1.7 and 3.3.1.8. The entire agreement can be found at: http:// www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm Thank you for choosing Network Solutions. Regards, Rick Rabuck| Network Solutions Executive Support Specialist _____________________ Clinton Fein 555 Florida Street, #407 San Francisco, CA 94110 Email: clinton@private www.clintonfein.com _____________________ -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] An open letter to PFIR on "Whois" privacy [priv] Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:57:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Dean Anderson <dean@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> One never needs to offer up "personal" contact information. But one does need to offer up legal contact information. This has been proven again and again: You need to put a legal address on your drivers licence, your car registration, your incorporation documents, the deed to your house and other property, your voter registration, patent and trademark registration, application for public demonstration, etc, etc, etc. Domain registration is no different than corporate registration, or trademark registration, which require legal contact information, and that contact information is available to the public. Why should a public protest require legal contact information yet a protest Web site not require similar information? Anonymity is not a right; Freedom of Expression is a right. There are situations where anonymity is available, and appropriate, and situations where anonymity is neither available nor appropriate. For example, your vote is anonymous; Your voter registration is not. If anonymity were a right, not a privilege, one could never have a fair election, since people would have a right to vote anonymously, and so they could vote many times. Dean Anderson Av8 Internet, Inc _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jun 24 2004 - 22:49:02 PDT