by Kevin Murphy
Domain registrars are fighting off critics of Whois privacy on multiple fronts at the ICANN meeting in Cartagena, Colombia this week.
In the latest example, registrars led by Tucows CEO Elliot Noss today savaged an ICANN draft advisory that would hold affiliated privacy services accountable for cybersquatting customers.
In May, ICANN said that as far as it is concerned proxy/privacy services are liable for how customers use their domains, under the Registrar Accreditation Agreement that all registrars must sign, unless they hand over the details of the true registrant.
The advisory highlighted ongoing tensions between domain registrants, which want privacy, and law enforcement and intellectual property interests, which want to be able to more easily track down cybersquatters and criminals.
But Noss said during a session in Cartagena today that almost every nastygram Tucows receives concerning its privacy services – the company gets one a day – comes from an IP lawyer.
He said that ICANN’s interpretation of the RAA assigns contract rights to third parties that would open up registrars to frivolous lawsuits.
Noss and Mason Cole from Oversee.net, representing ICANN registrars, said they would prefer dialogue with trademark owners and best practices for cooperation.
Tim Ruiz from Go Daddy said ICANN should “kill off” the advisory in its entirety.
But IP lawyers at the meeting, including Fabricio Vayra of Time Warner, said that best practice guidelines would need to be binding for all registrars in order to be effective.
The meeting ending with a vague promise from ICANN to organize further discussions.
max says
privacy is just an excuse for spammers and scammers to ply their trade IMO.
Enom is the number one spamming offender as far as i am concerned, they are scum.
Kate says
I don’t think privacy is only for those who have something to hide.
Oh we all have something to hide don’t we ?
For example some people have blogs dealing with political matters (not even talking about wikileaks) and I can understand they don’t want to be harrassed by stalkers. Ditto if you own adult domains.
What you own is nobody’s business.
BTW the registrars will lift privacy if there is a complaint, in fact most won’t require a court order, just convincing evidence. It seems we are talking about fixing what ain’t broken.
Bret Moore says
Completely disagree. The UDRP is cheap and quick. If they’re using privacy to mask their identity and then don’t respond to the UDRP, what the hell is the difference if their details were unmasked and they didn’t respond? Add in the geographical differences in jurisdiction (i.e., nobody’s going to sue small_time_scammer_7235 in the Ukraine in the Eastern District of New York). This just seems ridiculous to me; why is there even an argument? Because privacy services can be used by illegitimate people? Legitimate people use guns, alcohol, cars, just like criminals.
Chip Meade says
Corporations mask their domain ownership via shell corporations, fake companies etc… to keep their future development plans private. How is using a privacy service any different? I also believe some European laws REQUIRE privacy options for publicly available information. That is why most German registrars provide privacy for free. This is a non-starter in my view.