  Brand0n Premium join:2007-01-31 Valencia, CA | reply to Surpass Re: Domain name privacy
UPS Boxes are the best... i have had one in every state i have lived in |
|
  GilbertMark Premium join:2001-05-02 Gilbert, AZ | reply to decx 1 and 1 domains looks pretty good. Damn I'd save $45 a year transferring my .tv to them. |
|
 decx Premium join:2002-06-07 Vancouver, BC
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Surpass Personally I think the requirement for the info is a bit much for personal users. It's fine way back when owners of domains were usually businesses and the prevalence of spammers/data skimmers were much lower. With the misuse of the WHOIS data of recent years, ICANN really should look at other approaches to protect it's registrants' info.
In the mean time, registrars gets to earn extra revenue by acting as proxy. IMO, this is one of the few areas 1and1 has got right. Despite their sometimes problematic customer service, they offer private domain registration included in their already low registration price. |
|
  Surpass Premium join:2004-10-01 Orlando, FL
| reply to GilbertMark The UPS mailbox sounds good to me. I was just looking for comments on how a P.O. box stacks up to a UPS box, and the only pro of the P.O. seems to be the cheaper price.
After seeing this comment, now even I want one:
"When I go to the post office I leave upset. When I go to the UPS Store I leave happy!"

At any rate, the chances of your domain name being blitzed are slim with either one. |
|
  AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX | reply to GilbertMark That's just an extra layer they don't want to have to do, I guess. Anyway, it was useful for getting spammers deleted. |
|
  GilbertMark Premium join:2001-05-02 Gilbert, AZ
·Cox HSI
| reply to AmeritecTech Thanks all for the quick input here.
Maybe I'll go with a UPS post office box since they give a non p.o. box address. This is ridiculous when you think about it because LEOs could go to the P.O. or the UPS store and get their records via warrant if they had to to determine who rented the box. -- Got a V3 or a V3i or an L7? Want to get the most out of them? Check out my sites »hacktheV3.com and »hacktheV3i.com and »hacktheL7.com
|
|
  AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX
| reply to Surpass Pretty easy to Google, but:
With encouragement from stakeholders in the intellectual property arena,(9) ICANN has attempted to improve the quality of information in the Whois database. As law enforcers, we support the use of the proposed Registrar Accreditation Agreement (Accreditation Agreement) to elicit a more active role for registrars in ensuring that the Whois database contains accurate contact information.(10)
Several measures contained in the Accreditation Agreement are particularly noteworthy. One essential provision, paragraph II(J)(7), requires a registrar to collect contact information in a number of categories from an applicant for a domain name, and specifies that the applicant's willful failure to provide accurate information may result in the termination of the registration. From a law enforcement perspective, the most critical information gathered is the name and physical address of the domain name holder, which is necessary to identify an alleged wrongdoer and facilitate service of process.(11) »www.ftc.gov/os/1999/10/icann.htm
I have used this rule to get the domains of several spammer sorts deleted. -- "Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions." -John Callari |
|
  Surpass Premium join:2004-10-01 Orlando, FL | reply to AmeritecTech Can you tell us where this rule is posted exactly? |
|
  AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX | reply to GilbertMark No, must be a physical. PO's are not acceptable. You'll have to use Proxy if you want true protection. |
|