« Freeze on Fremont Foreclosures (in Massachusetts) | Main | Advocate's view on HOPE NOW hotline »

Wednesday, February 27, 2008


Stewart Engelman DNI Services

I agree that domain registrars should be aggressive in protecting customer privacy agreements, but always obey court orders to divulge the owner's identity when necessary to pursue a civil or criminal matter.

I think the much bigger issue here is the basis for requesting the identity of the domain owner. I think the Swiss bank was absolutely right in being defensive of sensitive, confidential data that might harm its customers if made public. The problem with Wikileaks service is that it is possibly inciting at least a portion of its customer base (i.e., "contributors") to break the law (hack, invade privacy) to obtain "content" for upload.

An opposing argument is that the fair use doctrine would defend Wikileaks position, as long as there was lack of sufficient eveidence by the claimant (the Swiss bank) that the percentage of information illegally pilfered as a direct result of the opportunity to post to Wikileaks was higher than a de minimus level.

The bottom line is that if the Swiss Bank cannot at least obtain access to Wikileaks customer base and find out who uploaded what, it has no opportunity of finding out whether or not the fair use doctrine applies. It is on this basis (reasonable cause) that I support the position of the Swiss bank. This point notwithstanding, the domain registrar should refuse to divulge the domain owner's bona fides until a court order is delivered.


Here's another for ya:

A sex-cult guru suing a forum for discussing the fact that the public needs to be warned about people like him.

Steven Roussey


Joshua Rubin

Which domain name registrars fight for the rights of their customers?

Which DNS operators?

Which hosting companies?

Which colocation facilities?


So what ISPs do you know of that fight for the privacy rights of their customers?

The comments to this entry are closed.