Friday, Friday, August 31, 2001, 5:29:07 PM, Kirk Fletcher wrote:
>> Unfortunately, according to ICANN mandate, all the information has
>> to be correct and verifiable - or you may lose the domain for
>> compliance reasons. Sad, but true.
> Then perhaps we should give customers the option of selecting
> us as an "authorised agent". My accountant receives lots of
> (snail) mail directed at me (which he forwards on) - so is
> there any reason we can't do the same? We could set up a
> catch-all account for them... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> As long as we have their main address on file somewhere, we
> can match up the receipt_no to forward on their mails (this
> isn't as much work as it sounds - since very little mail
> should go to it - most is spam and can be ignored).
> This still satisfies ICANN rules, since the address is still
> valid - it just prevents SPAM from getting through.
I spelled out a way to make something similar work in an automated
fashion on the GA-ICANN mailing list a couple months ago describing a
"Domain Agency" service.
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-sys/Arc00/msg00120.html
I do not support the concept that whois data should not be public, and
I don't support people being able to opt out of public whois. There
is a public purpose served by having domain registration information
public, and there is already a blacklisting service operational that
helps ISPs block email from domains that provide bogus whois
information, and I imagine they would modify that to block email from
any domain that opt-ed out of public whois if that were ever
implemented.
Privacy is the individual's responsibility, and there are plenty of
ways someone can protect their own privacy and still comply with the
rules.
--
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
