This is good news and I hope they get on with the proper process for it.

It's a start, but you should be able to obfuscate ALL the details, including the name, phone and email address.

Lias:

 

It's a start, but you should be able to obfuscate ALL the details, including the name, phone and email address.

 

Have you made a submission to that effect?

The consultation documents are here: https://dnc.org.nz/nz-whois-review-fourth-consultation
Submissions by email to policies@dnc.org.nz or post [remember that/] to P.O. Box 11-881, Wellington, 6142
[Submissions close 11am, Tuesday 8 November, 2016]

Guess that would stop the unsolicited gifts to the PO Box except that I dont really use my nz domain anywhere and just have them just because.

PolicyGuy:

 

 

 

Have you made a submission to that effect?

 

Have now.

I've got to say I'm gobsmacked that this allegedly "public consultation" has been going on for a year already. They have the contact details for every single .NZ domain owner in their database yet they haven't notified us that they are publicly consulting on the future of our personal information.

Apart from what I'd consider the utterly obvious step of notifying every .nz owner, I'm also surprised about how little other public notification appears to have happened. I work in IT, I'm pretty active online, I read a huge variety of IT and internet related websites, forums and newsletters, yet I only have vague memories of hearing about one of the previous rounds. I had a hunt through my inbox, the closest I can find is an IITP newsletter that links to a blog post on techblog, however the synopsis in the newsletter is only about Mat Honan being pwned.

Lias:

 

PolicyGuy:

 

 

 

Have you made a submission to that effect?

 

 

Have now.

 

I've got to say I'm gobsmacked that this allegedly "public consultation" has been going on for a year already. They have the contact details for every single .NZ domain owner in their database yet they haven't notified us that they are publicly consulting on the future of our personal information.

 

Apart from what I'd consider the utterly obvious step of notifying every .nz owner, I'm also surprised about how little other public notification appears to have happened. I work in IT, I'm pretty active online, I read a huge variety of IT and internet related websites, forums and newsletters, yet I only have vague memories of hearing about one of the previous rounds. I had a hunt through my inbox, the closest I can find is an IITP newsletter that links to a blog post on techblog, however the synopsis in the newsletter is only about Mat Honan being pwned.

 

Yea too true - terrible promotion of this via the domain name commission. I did make a submission though - there needs to be a process to get the information should you have a bone fide need and nothing about this was published by them.

Zeon:

 

 

 

Yea too true - terrible promotion of this via the domain name commission. I did make a submission though - there needs to be a process to get the information should you have a bone fide need and nothing about this was published by them.

 

I'm very much in the "don't give out ANYTHING without a court order or search warrant" camp. The courts are the appropriate venue to decide who gets my personal information. 

I may have missed something ... But on one hand you don't want to give out infomation without a court order or search warrant and then you say this:

Information wants to be free.
The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

Playing devils advocate, isn't it the right of a user to know who owns or is responsible for a domain/site before they interact with it?

Lias:

 

Zeon:

 

 

 

Yea too true - terrible promotion of this via the domain name commission. I did make a submission though - there needs to be a process to get the information should you have a bone fide need and nothing about this was published by them.

 

 

I'm very much in the "don't give out ANYTHING without a court order or search warrant" camp. The courts are the appropriate venue to decide who gets my personal information. 

 

DaveDog:

 

I may have missed something ... But on one hand you don't want to give out infomation without a court order or search warrant and then you say this:

 

Information wants to be free.
The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

 

Playing devils advocate, isn't it the right of a user to know who owns or is responsible for a domain/site before they interact with it?

 

There is an argument to be made for that, indeed some others did make it.

My personal feeling, paradoxical as it may be, is that while I don't support the right of an organisation I am forced to give my details to (e.g. the DNC) to publish without my permission, if someone hacked their database and leaked it I'd support the right for that leak to be shared. 

Lias:

 

It's a start, but you should be able to obfuscate ALL the details, including the name, phone and email address.

 

You would be surprised the number of domain owners who have no idea who set up the domain ,who is hosting the doamin, whose name its registered under &
who is the contact/admin email adress
Hiding all that would make it a nightmare to sort out domain issues with many small businesses 

1101:

 

 

 

You would be surprised the number of domain owners who have no idea who set up the domain ,who is hosting the doamin, whose name its registered under &
who is the contact/admin email adress
Hiding all that would make it a nightmare to sort out domain issues with many small businesses 

 

 

Their idiocy doesn't negate my right to privacy.