DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[nc-whois] read all the way through to the useful part of the post for this TF

  • To: "NC-WHOIS (E-mail)" <nc-whois@dnso.org>
  • Subject: [nc-whois] read all the way through to the useful part of the post for this TF
  • From: "Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>
  • Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 02:33:53 -0400
  • Sender: owner-nc-whois@dnso.org
  • Thread-Index: AcH3mF8dxT7RgrvnQ0KTbiC2hK38CwAVDWgw
  • Thread-Topic: [ga] Throw-away PR - is that what you want?

-----Original Message-----
From: George Kirikos [mailto:gkirikos@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 4:03 PM
To: ga@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [ga] Throw-away PR - is that what you want?


--- Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org> wrote:
> Bad enough, what I've seen so far points in the opposite direction:  
> The Consumer Project on Technology's director trying to abuse the GA 
> as a throw-away public relations tool.
> So, once again, the question to everyone involved with this: Do you  
> want that?  Do you really think that a little PR booster for a  
> campaign of CPTech is worth giving up on the GA?

No. Let's move on to something more on topic and within the scope of
the GA. If folks have alternatives to the Stuart Lynn plan, or
legitimate grievances within the context of domains, etc., those would
be appropriate for this forum. Saying "let's send it back to the DoC"
seems way out of scope, and should be done externally to the DNSO.

Just to revisit a topic from a week or two ago (and to put things back
on topics where the DNSO GA can have a voice), the privacy of the WHOIS
data, folks might be interested in a story from Newsbytes:


"Internet users who knowingly submit incorrect contact information when
registering Web addresses could face up to five years in jail under
legislation introduced in the House of Representatives this week."

In addition, someone on another mailing list pointed out a service at:


that does forwarding of all registrant contact info, for $20/yr. Some
had suggested that it would be extremely costly to have a lawyer or
another third party be a representative for a domain, but this goes to
show that the costs can be very low indeed, for those few who have a
need for the extra layer of privacy. I expect that with competition,
the price can be driven down even further, below $10. 


George Kirikos

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Mother's Day is May 12th!
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>