New Law - 7 Year In Prison For False Whois Info

[Lee]

WASHINGTON - A little-known bill that targets alleged online pirates who conceal their identities and has the potential to wreak more harm to privacy rights than good has become federal law.

-advertisement-

The so-called Fraudulent Online Identity Sanctions Act was introduced in late 2003 by U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), folded into the Intellectual Property Protection and

Courts Amendments Act passed in both houses of Congress in December 2004, and signed by President Bush later that month.

It would slap offenders with up to seven years in prison in criminal cases for what the language of the bill calls providing “material and misleading false contact information to a domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration authority”—a reference, according to some analysts, to the WHOIS database listing information about domain name owners.

Smith’s co-sponsor for the FOISA was Rep. Howard Berman (D-California), perhaps remembered best for a proposal to allow copyright holders to attack computers suspected of copyright infringement, an idea once notoriously supported by then-Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).

“In civil lawsuits, such as when the movie studios or the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sue someone over copyright infringement, the (FOISA) would make it far easier for them to claim $150,000 in damages for each violation,” wrote Internet journalist Declan McCullagh in February 2004.

“The justification? To make it easier to track down miscreants,” McCullagh continued, and went on to quote Smith in his story: “‘The government must play a greater role in punishing those who conceal their identities online, particularly when they do so in furtherance of a serious federal criminal offense or in violation of a federally protected intellectual property right,’ [Smith] said during a hearing in a copyright subcommittee.”

Smith also used his authority as the chairman of that subcommittee – the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property – to block opponents from testifying against the proposed legislation, according to McCullagh.

And he wasn’t the only one trying to sound an alarm about the FOISA. In May 2004, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Library Association, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and Public Knowledge sent a letter to House Judiciary Committee chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin) and ranking Democrat John Conyers (D-Michigan) denouncing a bill the group said would punish Americans seeking only online anonymity and infringe on their free speech rights.

“The WHOIS database requires that individual Internet users, when they register domain names, make their names, home addresses, home phone numbers, and home e-mail addresses available to the world, with no privacy protections,” the letter said. “Users covered by this requirement include human rights activists, corporate whistleblowers seeking to avoid retribution, and ordinary Americans seeking to avoid spam, stalking, or identity theft. As long as WHOIS lacks safeguards to protect their privacy and security, these users will feel compelled to place inaccurate data in the database for reasons that have nothing to do with furtherance of illegal activity.”

Alex Curtis, government affairs manager for the nonprofit advocacy organization Public Knowledge told AVNOnline.com that while the bill’s concept involves chasing infringing websites that distribute copyrighted materials, its language is too loosely worded in places.

“The idea is that you find an infringing website, and you go to the WHOIS register to find out who the person is who owns the website,” he said. “Essentially, it’s using the WhOIS register as a telephone book. And that’s where the penalties come into play. And ‘falsely register’ is kind of loosely defined. It could involve not having an up-to-date registry, which we have a big problem with.”

The bigger problem, Curtis said, is privacy, including that involving whistle-blowers.

“Say a former Ford employee is saying Ford cars aren’t safe; obviously (he) doesn’t want Ford to know who he is, and he’s using a Ford trademark,” Curtis said. “If I’m a (Ford) whistle-blower, I want to tell the public about a problem, but I don’t want to lose my job over it. Now I can’t register my domain (for a whistle-blowing site) without Ford finding out about it. It could probably chill a lot of speech with respect to that.

“And we’re not just talking about famous marks,” he continued. “Anyone who writes something on a Post-it note is a copyright owner. But if someone writes an e-mail and you post it without permission, now that person could sue you for copyright infringement. This isn’t just an issue of piracy.”

Earlier this month, Smith received a Defender of Property Rights award from a group called the Defenders of Property Rights, citing his work with the subcommittee. “Property owners, be they landowners or the owners of intellectual property rights, have no better friend in Congress than Lamar Smith,” said DPR president Nancie G. Marzulla in a formal statement.

“Intellectual property represents a large sector of the economy, employing more than 4 million Americans,” Smith said in a statement, accepting the award. “As our nation continues to shift from an industrial economy to an information-based economy, our economic assets are increasingly based in intellectual property. We must encourage its continued growth and protection.”

http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=221469

You'd better go check that your details in Whois are correct an pray that you dont make a typo when registering new domains

Regards,

Lee

[Bec]

From the email I just got from GoDaddy - that's not the only way our privacy is being violated ... check this out:

Dear Valued Go Daddy Customer,

Today I have the unfortunate responsibility of informing you that there has been a decision made by bureaucrats of a Federal agency that takes away your right to privacy as guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

This decision was unilaterally made by the National Telecommunications and Information Association ("NTIA") -- http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ -- without hearings that would determine the impact on those affected, and delivered without notice -- in short, the NTIA decision was made without due process of any kind. This is exactly how our government is not supposed to work.

The effect of this decision is to disallow new private domain name registrations on .US domain names. In addition, if you already own a private .US domain name registration, you will be forced to forfeit your privacy no later than January 26, 2006. By that time, you will need to choose between either making your personal information available to anyone who wants to see it, or giving up your right to that domain name.

I personally find it ironic that our right to .US privacy was stripped away, without due process, by a federal government agency -- an agency that should be looking out for our individual rights. For the NTIA to choose the .US extension is the ultimate slap in your face. .US is the only domain name that is specifically intended for Americans (and also those who have a physical presence in our great country). So think about this for a moment. These bureaucrats stripped away the privacy that you're entitled to as an American, on the only domain name that says that you are an American. I am outraged by this -- you should be also.

If, like me, you are outraged at the NTIA's decision to strip away our constitutional right to privacy, the Web site http://www.TheDangerOfNoPrivacy.com will provide you with a petition to sign. (Only your name will be published, your address and email information will be kept private.) This Web site also provides a very easy way for you to send either a fax or an email, expressing your outrage, to your Congressperson and Senators. This is all provided at no cost to you. All that is required is for you to take the time to visit http://www.TheDangerOfNoPrivacy.com sign the petition, and send the fax or email to your legislators.

On my personal Blog -- http://www.BobParsons.com -- there are a number of articles where you can learn more about the NTIA's unfortunate decision and what you can do to help get it reversed.

I also will be talking about our right to privacy on Radio Go Daddy, our weekly radio show that debuts today, March 30, at 7 PM PST. To find out how to listen in, please visit the Web site dedicated to the show, http://www.RadioGoDaddy.com

You can be sure that I, and everyone at GoDaddy.com, will do everything in our power to get the NTIA decision reversed. However, we need your help. Please visit http://www.TheDangerOfNoPrivacy.com to sign the petition and express your feelings to your Congressperson and Senators.

Sincerely,

Bob Parsons
President and Founder
GoDaddy.com

[EmporerEJ]

I think it a fairly easy get around for those of you that insist on privacy.

Simply create a Nevada Corporation, and make it the owner of your domains.
Nevada has the tightest corp laws on Privacy, Officer's identites remaining secret as one of them, which is a reason many adult companies are ALREADY there.

Just a thought.

[AusCoding Allan]

Hmm, I'd like to see them prosecute Australian companies for false whois information. I always use the correct whois information as I'm not in this business to hide who I am or what I do - I would prefer customers to be happy and if necessary be able to contact us.

Cheers,

Allan

[Matt 26z]

The GoDaddy email implies that this applies to only .US domains.

[Richard]

I say it's about dam time....

How many times have you tried to get ahold of an owner of a website who is too chicken to put their name or phone number anywhere? They all hide behind emails and forms that are never answered. Especially when they are scamming people. This is JMO. :frown:

[Matt 26z]

What makes you think that if someone has the balls to scam online, they'll follow a WhoIS accuracy law? This law does nothing to protect America from scammers. Nothing.

This is actually a law pushed by corporate America for them to easily track down copyright infringer's so they don't have to go through court to get their information.