Legitimate businesses do not hide behind anonymous domain registrations.
I disagree.
When companies come up with new products but while they are still thinking of a product name they will go out and acquire all the domain names for every candidate name of the product. They will do this using an intermediary, often a lawyer to get the belief that there is atty-client or work-product privilege and get the reality of a layer of isolation. This is a legitimate way of preparing for a product launch.
Well, I have to admire your dogged creativity in defending the privacy rights of criminals, but in this case, it would have helped if you'd read the decision. In this case the defendants were sending porn spam from addresses hidden behind WHOIS privacy services, which the court agreed was fraudulent. Do you really think that a court would find a genuine nominee, which understands the responsiblity for the actions its client may take in its name, to be fraudulent? Don't be ridiculous.
By-the-way, there are reasons to believe that Can-Spam could fail a Constitutional challenge, particularly for domain names used in a political or religious context or when it affects the exercise of a fundamental right.
Could you point out the sections of CAN SPAM that regulate political or religious speech? Here's a link to the law: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sup_01_15_10_103.html R's, John