discuss Private registration is under threat?

[Nerevar]

I just received this email from Napecheap:

Did you know that your privacy rights are currently under threat? ICANN is considering introducing a rule that would impact all netizens. If you care about your online privacy, this is a big deal.

Under new guidelines proposed by MarkMonitor and other organizations who represent the same industries that backed SOPA, domain holders with sites associated to "commercial activity" will no longer be able to protect their private information with WHOIS protection services. "Commercial activity" casts a wide net, which means a vast number of domain holders will be affected. Your privacy provider could be forced to publish your contact data in WHOIS or give it out to anyone who complains about your website, without due process. Why should a small business owner have to publicize her home address just to have a website?

We think your privacy should be protected, regardless of whether your website is personal or commercial, and your confidential info should not be revealed without due process. If you agree, please contact ICANN right away and demand your right to privacy and due process. Let them know you object to any release of info without a court order. There's no time to waste -- the close date for comments is July 7, 2015.

Visit our new site RespectOurPrivacy.com and we'll guide you through the process of calling or emailing ICANN. Thanks!

 

[Ms Domainer]

I have nothing to hide, so I really don't care.

In fact, this might be a good thing, rooting out evil warehousing registrars and other bad actors.

 

[iowadawg]

Same here.
I am all for removing private whois.
Be hard for the scammers, spammers and illegal activities to hide if their whois was public.

 

[Paully]

Same here.
I am all for removing private whois.
Be hard for the scammers, spammers and illegal activities to hide if their whois was public.

I disagree. Scammers, spammers and those planning illegal activities most likely use fake whois information anyway so removing whois protection won't affect or deter them but will lead to a deterioration of the underlying registry data on domains previously protected by whois guards as real name at real address will start to be replaced by fake name or domain manager at po box address.

 

[Hypersot]

I had an incident in the past where an individual started posting around that I'm a punk, thief, etc. just because he didn't like something on one of my parked pages (which as it is known, I have no control of)
Apparently, that domain was an illegitimate shopping site in the past and he thought I'm the owner (although I never verified this, that's what I managed to understand from the sayings)

He did that by copy/pasting my *real* details out of the whois . That is, my *real* name, address, tel. no, city I live, etc. and decorated them with some nice insults

The day I saw the posts, I realised how naked I am to everything and anything that intends to do me harm on the net.

Who can protect me from similar incidents except a whois privacy?
Who will protect me when I receive calls that have nothing to do in buying my domains from various entities around the globe?

Removing the privacy is a mistake. Just because of a handful individuals that use domaining in a bad way, we all have to pay the price

 

[StoneRoses]

As a domainer, I have no issue with this, however if I was a online business owner, I would hate this, why should my customers have access to my home address?.
I deal with the general public in my current role and have to say there are so many idiots about who start throwing threats around over something they perceive to be your fault, that giving them access to your home details is just dangerous.

The " I have nothing to hide" statements are fine for any normal person, but there are a lot of spiteful, malicious idiots out there who wont think twice about using that info for their own agenda.

 

[Kate]

The "I have nothing to hide" statements are just what the government likes to hear.
Show us everything, or you are a suspect !

Some people have valid reasons for using whois privacy.
Examples: whistleblowers, political sites.

In fact, there are many things you would not be comfortable saying on the Internet if they could be attributed to your 'real' person.
That's why we use aliases on the Web, on this forum...
Nothing to hide ? Use your real name instead of a nom de plume. And put your contact details in your signature. You never know, if somebody doesn't like what you write, they should be able to stalk you
Privacy is a right, so we should focus on preserving rights and liberties, not on killing them.

Note that privacy is not the same as anonymity.

 

[Willox Perez]

This is a plus for contacting end users as many of the sites you come across which you wish you had the contact information is blocked/private. On the flip side though if someone is harassing you by email too much you can block them out or mark them as a spammer so it is no problem.

Crazy how people get all frantic and pay extra for the privacy but that is the only thing that surprises me as this extra charge must be good income for the registrars in some way, surprise they are willing to let it go.

- Will

 

[LucidDomains]

I have emailed ICANN at [email protected]

Subject: Privacy is our right...Don't abolish it!

Dear ICANN

Regarding the proposed rules governing companies that provide WHOIS privacy services (as set forth in the Privacy and Policy Services Accreditation Issues Policy document):

I urge you to respect internet users' rights to privacy and due process.
- Everyone deserves the right to privacy.
- No one’s personal information should be revealed without a court order, regardless of whether the request comes from a private individual or law enforcement agency.

Private information should be kept private.

Thank you.

<my name>

(Email taken from https://www.respectourprivacy.com)

If you're want privacy online to continue for domain owners, it takes you 5 seconds to send the email.

Cheers.

 

[Ms Domainer]

I don't use my home address on Whois, nor would a company or company official. They use a COMPANY address.

I would be okay with privacy, but not as it stands. IN EVERY INSTANCE when I complained to registrars and ICANN about nefarious actors (ALWAYS using privacy), they did NOTHING to fix it. They all pointed fingers to the other (Registrars to ICANN, ICANN to the registrars, blah, blah, blah). Meanwhile, these bad actors continue to operate and pollute the web.

Everyone likes to compare buying domains with the real estate business, but when you buy a house, that info is public.

 

[Kate]

IN EVERY INSTANCE when I complained to registrars and ICANN about nefarious actors (ALWAYS using privacy), they did NOTHING to fix it.

I think we have two different issues here. Regardless of privacy settings, the registrars and the hosting companies can and should pull the plug on abusive websites/registrations. It doesn't matter whether the whois record and account details are genuine. They can still take action.

Even if you know who the offenders are, are you going to book a flight and punch them in the face in person ?

Everyone likes to compare buying domains with the real estate business, but when you buy a house, that info is public.

In the US, perhaps but not in every country. Which is a good thing. Why should anybody be able to look up my assets just by using google or some official registry. It's nobody's business after all.
In the US, it doesn't surprise me because privacy has become a dirty word in English. But since your finances are an open book, your adversaries (or a disgruntled spouse, or former partner) can dig on you and know if you're worth suing. Being sued at least once in your lifetime is part of being American isn't it.

Ever wondered why identity theft is so prevalent in the US ? Clearly, identity theft is linked the lack of privacy.

 

[jamesosix]

Yeah, it is strange, but I'm not at all comfortable with my address detail being in the public domain like this. I think we can start to see more and more individuals start using mail box/virtual addresses for this purpose.

 

[Ms Domainer]

Privacy is an illusion, anyway, and basically protects those wily skunks who have something to hide. The rest of us would have little idea on how to slip under the radar, privacy settings or not. BTW, registrars aren't OBLIGATED to keep your privacy intact; they have the power to shut down a bad actor's site or domain name. But they don't do it unless there is court order, citing legal concerns, even when it's clear that wrongdoing is occurring.

But putting that aside, if ICANN and registrars took complaints seriously and investigated them as they should, then privacy settings would be okay, with the understanding that illegal activities are not allowed in the name of privacy -- that a privacy setting is a privilege, not an inherent right.

 

[Domainace]

Privacy is an illusion if you are talking about the government finding you, yes. But domain privacy protects you from a lot of ordinary people with bad intentions.

Lack of privacy would prevent most people from writing political blogs, for example. Personal blogs will be self-censored, because you never know who might read it. I know this is a lost cause, as people seem not very concerned about their rights being steadily eroded.

As usual there is no case at all for stripping privacy rights. Spammers and scammers will use fake contact info and hardly be affected. Ordinary people, as usual, will bear the brunt.

 

[Ms Domainer]

If you use a credit card, the registrar has your personal info anyway and will give you up in a heart beat if it's in their best interests. A friend of mine found this out the hard way. So, for ordinary folks, privacy registration is an illusion.

Professional criminals know how to game the system to their advantage, with or without privacy settings.

If only registrars would follow ICANN rules and that ICANN would enforce its own rules would I think that privacy settings are a good idea. They just turn the other way and plead ignorance when you lodge a complaint -- or tell you to get a lawyer.

Frig that... (I'm avoiding cussing)

I don't even bother reporting anymore; it's an exercise in futility.

 

[Domainace]

I was talking more about cases such as someone losing their job or client because someone didn't like the comments they made on their website, or didn't like their website, or someone being stalked by one of their blog readers.

 

[Ms Domainer]

Although my first reaction was a bit flip, I DO see both sides of the privacy issue.

I do think that a political blogger wishing to remain anonymous (for safety reasons) is treading dangerous waters by depending on privacy registrations by registrars.

It would be better to create your own proxy; I certainly would not put my life in the hands of a registrar!

 

[cdboard]

fwiw, .US domains have restrictions on whois privacy.

 

[Ms Domainer]

fwiw, .US domains have restrictions on whois privacy.

And the sky hasn't fallen.

 

[Kate]

But .us is certainly not an option for controversial websites. Also, they seize domains by virtue of the seven dirty words rule. So much for the land of the not so free and your First Amendment rights.

Again, this is a very US-centric attitude on the part of Icann. Like the 60-day lock on transfers and new registrations. It apparently stems from US credit card processing rules (that are possibly outdated or vary anyway). There is no reason why all other countries should follow that nonsense rule. Or you could actually make it 180 days or worse... fortunately ccTLDs are governed in different ways.