Adam Peake wrote:
I am quite sure spammers, others trying to con, steal (whatever), abuse WHOIS. But I am equally sure there are many (as many, as few? I am not able to guess) who provide inaccurate (or un-helpful) information for privacy reasons. We are generally advised not to put personal information online. WHOIS is contrary to best practise.
Well, of course, especially when the "privacy" is desired because you're trying to con and steal and WHOIS. Sorry, but refusing to be identified -- when using a facility primarily used to _provide_ identity -- seems absurd. Registrars can perhaps offer proxy/escrow services, then, as part of their arsenal of tools to sell registrants for that kind of thing. You can get an unlisted phone number, but you pay for that and the phone company still maintains correct records on who owns a certain line. In other fields of public communications, people who want a buffer between themselves and others -- celebrities, victims, whistleblowers -- obtain agents to act as that buffer. But they still need to provide accurate information to their agent, and the agent is part of a chain of responsibility that is not obliged to protect those who use the buffer as a means to lie, cheat or misrepresent themselves. The right to privacy is not an absolute one -- it has numerous limits and is often subservient to many other human rights (such as the legal right to confront one's accuser). The right to maintain privacy, while maintaining the freedom to abuse the privacy rights of others, is neither best practise nor a suitable excuse for maintaining inaccurate information. Many people would certainly like to give fake information on their drivers' licenses or passports for various privacy-related reasons, and would certainly do so if certain laws did not prohibit that form of "privacy". - Evan