On 2010-10-26, at 7:38 PM, Bill Silverstein wrote:
I am sorry, but I believe that one of ICANN's main function is compliance with registrar/registrant agreements. Most of these situations are in part deal with non-compliant whois information.
How many spammers, scammers, fraudsters use accurate whois information?
Not many, and a lot of them add another layer of obfuscation to make investigation even more difficult: http://boxofmeat.net/post/1410205439/domainprivacy
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:29 PM, Beau Brendler <beaubrendler@earthlink.net>wrote:
Compliance is outside the scope of ICANN.
On 2010-10-27, at 9:10 AM, Jacqueline Morris wrote:
Registrar compliance is outside the scope?
No, it isn't: http://hostedjobs.openhire.com/epostings/submit.cfm?fuseaction=app.allpositi... On 2010-10-26, at 8:52 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote:
3. If there is unlawful activity then let law enforcement deal with it. Law enforcement people are more skilled in these things than ICANN and they are bound to adhere to fair procedures and subject to review; ICANN is not. We do not need more internet vigilantes.
Actually we do. Without net vigilantes (in the true dictionary definition sense of the word, IOW, those who form part of vigilance committees which come into being in the absence of law and order) we would not have an operative email system. Crime would be even more rampant than it is; Law enforcement agencies rely extensively on public-private and grassroots assistance. I've spent the past three months attending conferences dedicated to exactly that. The common theme presented across numerous groups? ICANN has a role to play, heretofore ignored, or poorly played.
5. Just because some people do things on the net that are unsavory
The issues we face as consumers on the Internet aren't merely 'unsavory' (sic). Dismissing them as such trivializes the problems we are fighting in the anti-abuse world. I hopefully needn't rehash what it is like out there'.
it does not follow that the net or a domain name or a TLD or electricity or binary bits - all of those things are involved in the things being complained of - are somehow the cause and must be forced to "comply".
No, true enough. But since gaping holes in policy are being constantly abused, doesn't it behoove us as community members to advocate for filling them, and those agencies in a position to do something about the issues to use what tools they have at hand to at least try to do something about them. I simply don't buy the slippery slope argument you present. Just because I got a justified speeding ticket yesterday doesn't mean I'll be unjustly arrested for bank robbery tomorrow. -- Neil Schwartzman Executive Director CAUCE The Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email, North America Inc. http://cauce.org http://twitter.com/cauce AIM: caucecanada Tel.: +1 (303) 800 6345 -- Neil Schwartzman Executive Director CAUCE The Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email, North America Inc. http://cauce.org http://twitter.com/cauce AIM: caucecanada Tel.: +1 (303) 800 6345