Robert L Mathews wrote:
Even if it were always the case that "domain-owner->connectivity",
wouldn't that just reinforce the point I made? If they're the same
person, there's no need to complain to the domain owner; just send the
report to the connectivity provider from ARIN, and it'll reach the right
person anyway.
Why look up netblocks when you can use a public resource for its
intended purpose?
And that you rarely get spam, for example, from people who have colocated
a server someplace and started selling Viagra, or gambling, or porn
through their domain name?
Spam's not a reportable/actionable offense under our AUP. Only threats
and similar probably-criminal offenses are.
The contact information for
network operators is by definition in ARIN WHOIS, not domain WHOIS, so I
I don't quite follow the argument that reporting abuse to network
operations personnel requires domain WHOIS -- it seems to argue just the
opposite.
But that's domain WHOIS' purpose. Most people have never heard of ARIN
WHOIS, or ARIN for that matter, and there's no ned for them to.
For example, the domain owner's postal address would still be available
in the event of a lawsuit. And for simple form-letter copyright
violations, the DMCA provides an official way for intellectual property
owners to communicate directly with the ISP, who notifies the domain
owner, and the domain owner can then respond with their physical address
if they want to fight it.
Again, far too cumbersome -- why bring the ISP into it when they're not
a player?
(I've noticed that most people who defend the use of WHOIS for legal
purposes just assume that the current WHOIS system is accurate.
No, only that it should be.
In the
case of "bad guys", particularly egregious spammers, I've often found
just the opposite to be the case,
Again, for us, spammers are irrelevant.
and even if it isn't intentional, a
good fraction of domain WHOIS data is out-of-date.
Deal with that, don't dismiss it.
Again, we're
presumably talking about evildoers here: asking them to enter their true
address isn't something we can rely on for legal purposes.
Then they should be audited, not tossed out.
And again,
since the ISP is always going to be contactable, they're probably going
to be a better bet for legal communication than the domain owner anyway.)
Again, who cares about ISPs?
