Rudi and all, The reason why we shouldn't do as you and Belgium government suggests is that the whole world doesn't live in Belgium, and because such would violate many other countires national laws. -----Original Message-----

From: Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@isoc.be> Sent: Apr 7, 2008 8:52 AM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Community Input Requested on Two Draft Statements from ALAC to the ICANN Board

Evan Leibovitch schreef:

...

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.

WHOIS information on the registrant should be public in case registrant is an official organisation, a company, a self-employed or any other public organisation. In Belgium, you need to publish on any official document, including your website, your official organisation form, full address and company registration number. As such, you can always be identified in an official national database (KBO). Why should we not apply these rules on registrant information ?

Rudi Vansnick ISOC Belgium chair Board member ISOC-ECC Board member EURALO

...

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

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827