3 ms·

> Could this be worked around by using a pseudonym, registering a PO Box address, and using the number from a pay-as-you-go SIM card? Not false information as s

by raquo 11y ago

> Could this be worked around by using a pseudonym, registering a PO Box address, and using the number from a pay-as-you-go SIM card? Not false information as such, but not particularly revealing either. No. They will require PO box providers to be accredited with ICANN and subject to all these crazy rules, giving you no privacy. > Alternatively, one could enter information that looks plausibly valid but is in fact completely invented. This is exactly what all the real crooks will do, but you and me will not be able to, because we don't want to lose our domains.

techsupporter 11y ago
> No. They will require PO box providers to be accredited with ICANN and subject to all these crazy rules, giving you no privacy. Well, I'd be very interested to see how ICANN could get post offices, like the United States Postal Service or Royal Mail, to go along with submitting to ICANN accreditation. That aside, data on people who own USPS-provided post office boxes and boxes held at commercial mail receiving agencies (CMRAs, like the UPS Store, and so on) can be obtained from the USPS, per 39 CFR 265.6(d)(5)(i) through (iii): (i) To a federal, state or local government agency upon prior written certification that the information is required for the performance of its duties. (ii) To a person empowered by law to serve legal process, or the attorney for a party in whose behalf service will be made, or a party who is acting pro se, upon receipt of written information that specifically includes all of the following: (a bunch of things) (iii) In compliance with a subpoena or court order, except that change of address or boxholder information which is not otherwise subject to disclosure under these regulations may be disclosed only pursuant to a court order. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/39/265.6 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/39/265.6
- raquo 11y ago
  Well USPS being unaccredited will obviously be the domain "owner"s' problem, not ICANN's.
talideon 11y ago
> No. They will require PO box providers to be accredited with ICANN and subject to all these crazy rules, giving you no privacy. What makes you think that? ICANN's requirement is that you provide a valid address you are contactable at. A PO box fulfils that requirement.
mrhhug 11y ago
I agree with you. Because using completely invented information makes me a liar. And why do they need it? Its not like they are sending packets to that address. We should stop every invasion of freedom no matter how well it is sold. ICANN is only the authority because we all said they are the authority. Do you know the fight that would break out if we lost faith in ICANN and multiple firms in the right economic place who know the right people at the right time provided an alternative authority? The switch to ipv6 is already weakening ICANN authority. The value of an ip address is decreasing. We have to trust someone. End users are not gonna type in ip addresses human brains just aren't wired like that. But talking with any government is not cool. ICANN is a trust all citizens of earth currently agree on. ICANN is the global diplomat they need diplomatic immunity - and need not abuse it.
hobs 11y ago
I dont like to be taken as threatening, but it feels like the rulers up in ICANN who are making these decisions need to understand the impact of said decisions and as they are not avoiding dangerous people or situations, they simply dont care. Are all of their domain names registered properly? Shall we start sending them A LOT of mail explaining these consequences?

by raquo 11y ago

techsupporter 11y ago

> No. They will require PO box providers to be accredited with ICANN and subject to all these crazy rules, giving you no privacy. Well, I'd be very interested to see how ICANN could get post offices, like the United States Postal Service or Royal Mail, to go along with submitting to ICANN accreditation. That aside, data on people who own USPS-provided post office boxes and boxes held at commercial mail receiving agencies (CMRAs, like the UPS Store, and so on) can be obtained from the USPS, per 39 CFR 265.6(d)(5)(i) through (iii): (i) To a federal, state or local government agency upon prior written certification that the information is required for the performance of its duties. (ii) To a person empowered by law to serve legal process, or the attorney for a party in whose behalf service will be made, or a party who is acting pro se, upon receipt of written information that specifically includes all of the following: (a bunch of things) (iii) In compliance with a subpoena or court order, except that change of address or boxholder information which is not otherwise subject to disclosure under these regulations may be disclosed only pursuant to a court order. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/39/265.6 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/39/265.6

raquo 11y ago
Well USPS being unaccredited will obviously be the domain "owner"s' problem, not ICANN's.

talideon 11y ago

> No. They will require PO box providers to be accredited with ICANN and subject to all these crazy rules, giving you no privacy. What makes you think that? ICANN's requirement is that you provide a valid address you are contactable at. A PO box fulfils that requirement.

mrhhug 11y ago

I agree with you. Because using completely invented information makes me a liar. And why do they need it? Its not like they are sending packets to that address. We should stop every invasion of freedom no matter how well it is sold. ICANN is only the authority because we all said they are the authority. Do you know the fight that would break out if we lost faith in ICANN and multiple firms in the right economic place who know the right people at the right time provided an alternative authority? The switch to ipv6 is already weakening ICANN authority. The value of an ip address is decreasing. We have to trust someone. End users are not gonna type in ip addresses human brains just aren't wired like that. But talking with any government is not cool. ICANN is a trust all citizens of earth currently agree on. ICANN is the global diplomat they need diplomatic immunity - and need not abuse it.

hobs 11y ago

I dont like to be taken as threatening, but it feels like the rulers up in ICANN who are making these decisions need to understand the impact of said decisions and as they are not avoiding dangerous people or situations, they simply dont care. Are all of their domain names registered properly? Shall we start sending them A LOT of mail explaining these consequences?