Domaintools.com'ReverseWhoIs Dilemma !

Why is that a problem, especially if that oldest record belonged to, say, a previous owner?

The only problem I see with this service is the price they want.

the service violates the TOS of most registrars and the whois they provide.

The whole whois needs to be scrapped.

By mid-2013 there should be an ICANN report on many of the privacy/identity theft issues related to whois. I don't think much will change.

The main problem with DomainTools is that it basically charges for what is free information (if it was govt information it would be illegal to do this). It does violate most registrar T&C I would think.

I have no issue with current whois. I have issues with aggregating data and providing unintended alternative data access. Too much room for abuse.

snicksnack said:

the service violates the TOS of most registrars and the whois they provide.

Click to expand...

defaultuser said:

It does violate most registrar T&C I would think.

Click to expand...

That's essentially the debate. For those who feel there's no debate to that, you may refer to the previous discussions about that on the legal section, and namely take note of JBerryhill's observations as a lawyer with actual years of experience.

Unfortunately only the registrar can determine if their TOS is violated by DomainTools' action. IIRC, though, some of them even partnered with DomainTools.

defaultuser said:

The main problem with DomainTools is that it basically charges for what is free information (if it was govt information it would be illegal to do this).

Click to expand...

Lots of people charge for what's essentially free information, namely consultants with years of experience in their fields. After all, it does cost money, effort and time (time is money for some) to gather particularly specialized information altogether.
Besides, it does cost money to maintain the hardware, software and peopleware to preserve data somewhere. Maybe not as much as before, but who's paying for all that anyway?

Most registrars have the following condition/TOS regadring their whois:

" The compilation, repackaging, dissemination or other use of this Data is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent."

My registrar for example did not approve or consent to it and still DomainTools does store the data...

Dave Zan said:

Why is that a problem, especially if that oldest record belonged to, say, a previous owner?

Click to expand...

The whois histories for domains are ok (especially for events like domain buying, trading). Anyone interested in a domain can look up for it using domaintools.

But why ReverseWhoIs ?

I have no idea about the corresponding law regarding ReverseWhoIs. But these days when domains are considered as wealth,property,money,honey ; isn’t it bad to provide free unrestricted public disclosure of the sample “oldest record in our archive” ?
I don’t want any Tom, Dick or Harry to know about my wealth details unless the law/world/society requires it.

The other day someone asked me “hey you own that awesome domain”.
I never tell/told anyone and never use/ed for any communication purpose regarding that particular domain and no one knows about that domain owned by me and for the time being it’s under private registration.
When I asked, she said she found it via domaintools ReverseWhoIs.

Searching a bit ,another thing I noticed for several times, any .COM domain registered are being searched for whois .
Now for test you can register “forexampleabout whoisviolationsbyreversewhois.com” and check for whois history after few days. You will find that, there will be a whois history within two days after the registration date. The same doesn’t happen with any other extensions.

In a better world, the ReverseWhoIs feature should be used only for and by the law department and and must n’t be entertained for any Tom, Dick or Harry.

Messenger said:

isn’t it bad to provide free unrestricted public disclosure of the sample “oldest record in our archive” ?

Click to expand...

Why is that bad, considering WHOIS is public to begin with? Then again, they didn't specifically reveal that oldest record and for free at that, right?

All they said is the oldest record for this domain is on this date. And that's just about it.

I do get people's desire to keep certain information about themselves private. While this isn't necessarily authoritative, I gather this is generally what people consider as privacy:

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy"]Privacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Privacy is the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves or information about themselves and thereby reveal themselves selectively. The boundaries and content of what is considered private differ among cultures and individuals, but share basic common themes. Privacy is sometimes related to anonymity, the wish to remain unnoticed or unidentified in the public realm.

Click to expand...

When you share information about yourself with someone else, how much privacy (if any) practically depends if that someone else is willing to provide. The moment you post anything online, it's out there.

OTOH, I don't recall the Internet promising, much more guaranteeing, privacy in the first place. Making it easier to share information, sure, but keeping privacy or anonymity is a different story.

Dave Zan said:

Why is that bad, considering WHOIS is public to begin with? Then again, they didn't specifically reveal that oldest record and for free at that, right?

All they said is the oldest record for this domain is on this date. And that's just about it.

Click to expand...

As of now they do reveal the oldest record according to some given input and that's for free.

If you search for Dave Zan, you will get that davezan.com was the oldest archive record for that name captured in first place.

And that's why I hate it. Free disclosure of some unwanted personal information. Free resources are vulnerable for misuse.

Messenger said:

As of now they do reveal the oldest record according to some given input and that's for free.
If you search for Dave Zan, you will get that davezan.com was the oldest archive record for that name captured in first place.

And that's why I hate it. Free disclosure of some unwanted personal information. Free resources are vulnerable for misuse.

Click to expand...

Heh, saying they have the oldest record for this domain at this date definitely doesn't cost anything. What I mean is they don't reveal the actual WHOIS info of that record unless you pay for it.

Anything can be used and misused, depending on the person's intent. Like I said, though, if that domain was registered to someone else before you, then that oldest record belonged to someone else other than you, why should that matter other than maybe personal preference?

Anyway, you'll be okay. Cheers.

Messenger said:

I have no idea about the corresponding law regarding ReverseWhoIs. But these days when domains are considered as wealth,property,money,honey ; isn’t it bad to provide free unrestricted public disclosure of the sample “oldest record in our archive” ?
I don’t want any Tom, Dick or Harry to know about my wealth details unless the law/world/society requires it.

Click to expand...

you must not own property then, because anyone can look up who owns a building/parcel of land, how much they paid for it, when it was bough, what the property taxes are, what it was appraised for, and much more.

lothos said:

you must not own property then, because anyone can look up who owns a building/parcel of land, how much they paid for it, when it was bough, what the property taxes are, what it was appraised for, and much more.

Click to expand...

Well, it's America. In other countries, there is more privacy.
To obtain that kind of information you would have to have a good reason, perhaps if you are a creditor or a notary public.

Approaches also vary when it comes to domain extensions.
For example .us does not allow whois privacy, Canada does for individuals, and other ccTLDs too.
Domaintools can only scrape what's available to them.