Bill Silverstein wrote:
If someone registers a domain name to "John Smith" and is actually "Jack Jones" that is hardly the registrar's responsibility. Not until the registrar is notified that the information is not valid. I have seen many occasions where the information is clearly not valid. The reigsrar permits the information to be corrected or gives 15 days to correct the information instead of terminating the domain name immediately. One example is 123 Yellow Brick Road.
And if the registrars ignores it trying to make it an issue for courts etc? Here the registrar and ICANN knows the address is fake: http://www.badwhois.info/wp/?m=200902 Some follow up domains have the same fake registration details via the same registrar.
Now if a registrar was knowingly and intentionally aiding fraudsters to commit fraud then it's a different matter..
Also, private individuals have a right to privacy, which is why registration proxy services are so popular.
Agreed. But "criminals" also love privacy? Also the same registrar mentioned previously, has privacy policies that even raised a comment in Mexico.
If no crime is being committed, then a registrant should have the right to privacy ..
Illegal spam is not a crime. Copyright violation is not a crime.
Under the terms of the registration contract, these proxy registration services are liable for harm. Will it hold up in court? Maybe, maybe not, regardless of how deserving!
I have personally pointed out fraud being committed (bank spoofs) using private registrations to registrars. The registrars accepted this but allowed much more of the same. In fact this also appears to have become a method of hiding an identity theft problem in registrations where the registrar became aware of the problem. What about the privacy provider? I recently came across a domain reseller, deliberately in Turkey, claiming privileged relationship with law enforcement that will cause them to turn a blind eye, using privacy providers in Sudan and Hong Kong who also happen to be attorneys. Part of the sell was that they tolerate anything on their services and not law, court orders or similar can get you removed from the net. Some food for thought: http://fakewebsitecash.org/ We cannot deny that there is a lot on "abuse" by whichever name on the net, abusing systems, law and whatever to enrich certain elements at the cost of "defrauding" others with fake offers, impersonation etc. It is just a case of defining this "abuse" as not acceptable, so it cannot be "abused" in itself. Derek