Whois.sc / domaintools.com past whois records - 100% legal?

[euro_guy]

is it legal for domaintools to display archived whois records for each domain, for which people have searched through them at some point?

whois records are public by default, but i'm not sure if archiving them and showing them 10 years later for premium subscribers is legal as well.

any lawyers here with some input?

as for now, they offer the option to block whois.sc history for each doamain for short term purposes, for $10 per day, but apparently ABSOLUTELY NO way of deleting past whois records

 

[labrocca]

If it was public record at one point then it's legal. They are legit.

 

[shockie]

keeping track of public information should be legal... it could be creepy, but legal nonetheless. isn't it also legal for people to go through your garbage? :blink:

 

[Dave_Z]

This has actually been discussed before, and it's argued both ways. Let's just say that what Whois.sc/DomainTools is doing is currently and debatably "legal" until either: a) some applicable law in some applicable jurisdiction or b) some applicable legal decision says it's not.

 

[Name Trader]

I think it's legal just so long as it's displaying the results of actual searches done from their website. If they were displaying results which were harvested by some kind of bot, then I think that would break mosts registrars ToS.

 

[Kate]

The compilation of whois data is certainly debatable.

 

[SeanPreston]

The compilation of whois data is certainly debatable.

Agreed, I think we will see some changes in the next few years how Whois is handled and viewed so publicly.

Sean

 

[Dave_Z]

I think we will see some changes in the next few years how Whois is handled and viewed so publicly.

Seven years being debated by interest groups and ICANN, and still counting.

 

[jmcc]

Domaintools.com/whois.sc, in some jurisdictions, infringes on the rights of others (the registries) and repackages that data for sale in contravention of the terms of access of some of the WHOIS services. Something being public does not mean that it is copyright free.

Regards...jmcc

 

[Domagon]

Seven years being debated by interest groups and ICANN, and still counting.

:bah: So true.

On a related note, it's more likely ICANN will seek even more public, standardized whois; elimination of Whois Privacy services, which is already frowned upon in some ICANN regulated TLDs.

Ron

 

[snicksnack]

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

According to this, it would not be legal unless they have written permission to do so.

 

[BitcoinDK]

:bah: So true.

On a related note, it's more likely ICANN will seek even more public, standardized whois; elimination of Whois Privacy services, which is already frowned upon in some ICANN regulated TLDs.

Ron

As a side note... in danish domain extension .dk it is not possible to have Privacy Services. All informations is shown to public.

 

[jmcc]

As a side note... in danish domain extension .dk it is not possible to have Privacy Services. All informations is shown to public.

The amount of data provided by European registries varies depending on how the registries interpret their local data privacy laws. Some of them such as IEDR (the Irish .ie registry) have a thin whois and only list the registrant and contacts with no e-mail and address data. Nominet (the .uk registry) has a more comprehensive whois but allows registrants to opt-out.

Regards...jmcc