Originally posted by timechange.com
But of course, the rationale behind the 'domains by proxy' is the legitimate shielding of the contact information, citing spamming or privacy reasons.

I don't agree with you here. I think that the obligation is legally is clarity in terms of the beneficial owership of the domain. Spam avoidance is not excuse for "shielding" ones beneficial ownership. Many services exist, along with Spam filters client and server side, which could adequately address this issue.

Personally, I think that the rationale was a simple one. Given that the vast majority of registrants are speculators, GoDaddy probably figured than offering a "legal" i.e. valid contact on whois, shielding service, might attract many who would otherwise use a "fraudulent" whois record. Thereby, avoiding challenges due to whois contact info illegitimacy.

Originally posted by timechange.com
An interesting thing with GoDaddy is that in their agreement mention that they can essentially hijack the DNS, thus making a domain inaccessible, if it were registered by them; regardless of what DNS is being used, if the owner is accused of spamming. [/B]

Not surprising. Domains by Proxy would be perfect for a spammer. Register a disposable address, with a (mistaken they might be) built in identity shield.

Originally posted by safesys
I wonder how hard DBP would try to defend any threats towards the domain. I would imagine they'd just hand it over (why incurr costs when they are not contractually bound to do so).

Frankly, no only would they not defend an action, but I don't even think that a subpoena would be required to have them reveal the beneficial owners data.

Why incur undue liability in engage for almost no premium to other discount registrars. If I'm not mistaken, they dropped their prices to $9.99 approx. which would hardly make this service a money earner.

Safesys,

I assume that the UK is pretty agressive is having ISPs or Registrars "cooperate" with the authorities in cases involving illegality and the internet. Is that the case?

But everything is traceable down to a credit card number, so I don't think that anyone in their right mind would attempt to shield illegal activities. I think the issue that arises is that given the thread in DNF, how does one use a different persona or entity to disassociate themselves from a specific domain. Also, despite GeorgeK's failure to provide a 'yes' or 'no' answer, the fact is that he has valid contact info in the WHOIS records. The question is whether the "trustee fund" is real or imaginative. Despite the validity of such a query, in my opinion he does not have to disclose that.

I assume that the UK is pretty agressive is having ISPs or Registrars "cooperate" with the authorities in cases involving illegality and the internet. Is that the case?

Absolutely.

Personally, I think that the rationale was a simple one. Given that the vast majority of registrants are speculators, GoDaddy probably figured than offering a "legal" i.e. valid contact on whois, shielding service, might attract many who would otherwise use a "fraudulent" whois record. Thereby, avoiding challenges due to whois contact info illegitimacy.

I agree entirely with this - godaddy have their ear close to the ground in the domainer world.

If people wanted spam avoidance, they could just sign up with a.n.other free email service for their registrations - problem solved.

There are numerous ways people can have legitimate WHOIS information, which also shields their private information without having a completely false record.

Given how easy it will be to get past that layer for anything serious it seems to be more a charter for the low-tech abuser (spammers, tm infringers etc) to have a means to lose domains without having it show on their score card.

Sounds like disposable domains will be the next rage

Sounds like disposable domains will be the next rage

Judging by the domains that get dropped, it seems we've already got those

As a humorous aside, it seems that GeorgeK (or his "client") has changed the affiliate programs at restricted.com.

Take a look:

http://www.restricted.com

I guess that Kara's Playground wasn't converting, so one has to go even further downscale ... to C*M FIESTA.

Sad really.

I prefer MILF Hunter myself