[atlarge-discuss] Re: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Dan and all former DNSO GA members or other interested parties,

  I agree, as do it seems most of our members, stakeholders/registrants
all.  It is clear that George is amongst a tiny number or
Stakeholder/registrants
that has been either mislead, or fails to grasp one of  the fundamental
aspects
of this Whois Task force Final report.  Perhaps this is in part intentional
on the part of the Whois Task force's campaign to sell this Reports
recommendations.  At least it would appear so, and it would also appear
that some success, at least in George's case to be successful.

  I personally want to thank you Dan for trying with all due diligence,
to attempt to set the actual record of this portion of the WHois Task
Force Report straight, and what some of the consequences for
Registrants/stakeholders are and what is actually at stake here,
pardon the pun.

  Our members should be finished voting on this Whois Task force
Final report and it's elements individually this evening.  I shall be given
that data shortly as I understand it, and will post those results
here and else where for informational purposes.  Last I checked
the running tally was about 4 to 1 against.

Dan Steinberg wrote:

> George,
>
> Once again I think you have failed to catch my meaning :-)
>
> This is not a debate about greater WHOIS prvacy no matter how you word it.
> It is a debate about decreasing existing privacy rights.
> If from the get-go...there had been an inalienable right for anyone in
> the world to have such info...it would have been built into the STAR
> WARS defense (defence) system and enshrined in law long ago. It simply
> is not true.
> Thats why....nobody bothered for a while. it was just a personal
> decision people took....what to insert in their whois date *if* they got
> a domain...or if they decided to let someone else they trusted get one
> from someone else...etc etc. There never was such a right.
> You are trying to create one.
> So....if after informed debate...you can convince the majority...that
> there is a need for this *new* right  to whois data...as a populist and
> democratic...I will accept it.
>
> But please, start from the beginning. Find a way to prove to the
> populace...that the new need exists...and if so...get it enshrined into
> law....cause...exceptions to the rule...thats where they belong. In a
> law...where it is visible. and where you have some recourse if you think
> the law is not fair.
>
> George Kirikos wrote:
>
> >Hi Dan,
> >
> >--- Dan Steinberg <synthesis@videotron.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>George,
> >>
> >>With respect,
> >>I think you have it backwards.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Well, it all depends on one's perspective. I don't believe there's an
> >*entitlement* to WHOIS privacy. It's a policy decision. Part of that
> >good policy is to consider the pros and cons, the costs and benefits.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Society is an aggregation of people and other entities...who decide
> >>by
> >>majority or force of someones bigger guns, or whatever...to agree to
> >>certain limitations on the basic right to do whatever you want.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >And if the majority is in favour of greater WHOIS privacy, after an
> >informed debate, I can cope. I'm a populist and democratic. :) But,
> >there are winners and losers, no matter how the question is decided. I
> >believe the status quo is a fair compromise, and allows a
> >privacy-seeker very low cost mechanisms to increase their privacy,
> >without allowing abusers to become more rampant and emboldened,
> >shifting the costs of their abuse to others.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Now if you frame it that way...
> >>what economic value do you place on the right to take away my
> >>privacy?
> >>Name the annual dollar benefit and identify who else would benefit
> >>and
> >>how it would over alll ...benefit our society?
> >>Can you do it this way?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Sure, for the sake of argument, I can. I trust you, Karl, Ross, Michael
> >or others will do the same? :)
> >
> >The benefit to me personally in having the WHOIS be public and accurate
> >is approximately equal to the cost savings in having to initiate a
> >lawsuit in order to acquire that information, if it was deemed that
> >WHOIS privacy should rule. It's also the cost saving from having less
> >abuse on the internet in general. As someone who uses the internet
> >quite a bit, I think these costs are on the order of thousands of
> >dollars per year, or at a minimum a few hundred dollars a year (i.e.
> >averaged out). I use WHOIS a lot. :) Even if I didn't use WHOIS a lot,
> >the fact that it's out there means less abuse, as it's a deterrent.
> >
> >Some others who benefit from having public WHOIS:
> >
> >1) folks who cannot afford high legal costs (it costs thousands of
> >dollars to initiate a legal case, compared to a couple of dollars for
> >individual Domains by Proxies subscriptions)
> >2) law enforcement
> >3) courts, through lower number of cases in front of them (encouraging
> >responsible internet usage reduces crimes overall; having free access
> >to WHOIS means fewer subpoena requests, challenges to the subpoenas,
> >etc., esp. since they can be international in scope)
> >4) emergency professionals
> >
> >For #4, consider the recent case at:
> >
> >http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/56497p-52905c.html
> >http://www.arizonarepublic.com/arizona/articles/0205webfolo.html
> >http://www.stepzero.org/temp/ripper.html
> >
> >where a teen overdosed on drugs which in a chatroom and on cam. The
> >victim even mentions WHOIS in the chat logs, as a way to reach his
> >family or for 911. Tragically, the WHOIS appears to have been
> >inaccurate (phone number was a phone 555-1234), and the teen died. I've
> >personally talked a few folks out of suicide online, and in one case
> >had to rely upon WHOIS to help reach one of their relatives. Others
> >have done the same, reaching their ISP, etc....when time is of the
> >essence, every piece of data helps.
> >
> >So, the question for society and policy-makers: who should bear the
> >costs? Should it be legitimate Privacy-seekers who can spend a couple
> >of dollars per year? Or society at large, where legitimate individuals
> >and companies might need to spend thousands of dollars to get the
> >privacy through increased legal costs, time delays, and the suffering
> >of greater abuse?
> >
> >Having private WHOIS is really "security by obscurity", ultimately,
> >which those in the security business will tell you is the *worst* kind
> >of security to rely upon. A determined person can kill you, no matter
> >what you do! Scary isn't it? I don't lose much sleep at night, though,
> >over that truth. What kind of message does it give vulnerable people
> >that to be safe, they need to hide? Folks should publish their contact
> >details proudly and show they're not afraid. If the other person has to
> >reveal themselves to take their shot at you, that might be your chance
> >to protect the rest of society, by catching them.
> >
> >Better protection involves stronger laws, promotion of responsible
> >behaviour, and harsh punishments for those who break the law. WHOIS
> >privacy does none of this, and indeed hinders the promotion of
> >responsible behaviour.
> >
> >I'm really looking forward to your measurements of the economic
> >*benefits* of increased privacy.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >
> >George Kirikos
> >http://www.kirikos.com/
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Dan Steinberg
>
> SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
> 35, du Ravin            phone: (613) 794-5356
> Chelsea, Quebec         fax:   (819) 827-4398
> J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de