Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Abuse

ox <andre@ox.co.za> you wrote:
Are fake whois records abuse? I think this is an excellent question and requires discussion.
Personally I think filing fake information to a resource is actually a crime called fraud. I am sure that this is also a crime under Dutch law and that the Dutch Law enforcement should investigate this?
Why yes! (Now why didn't *I* think of that?) Yes, by all means, let's take a violation of contractual terms between two private parties and turn it into a law enforcement matter. And while we're at it, let's have Interpol come out to your house and cuff you for those rental DVDs you returned 2 days late. Yes, that's obviously the best choice, and the best possible use of limited law enforcement resources. And look at how well it worked out in the Aaron Swartz case! So I'm sure your're right. But you shouldn't rely on just _my_ humble opinion. Why not ask the RIPE NCC legal team how many of those 7 cases of non-financial contract breaches in 2015 and 2016 they called in law enforcement on. I'm sure they'll tell you they did so in all 7 cases... ... or maybe not.
But, imho, fake whois records and/or incorrect whois records, is not abuse.
Yes. What the hell! Let's just turn off the RIPE WHOIS server and then everything will be so much simpler and straightforward. At least then we won't have to wonder anymore. Instead we will be SURE that none of us has the least clue who is actually using which IP ranges, or who takes responsibility for any of them. A rational choice, if ever there was one. Regards, rfg

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 01:11:44 -0700 "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com> wrote:
ox <andre@ox.co.za> you wrote:
Are fake whois records abuse? I think this is an excellent question and requires discussion. Personally I think filing fake information to a resource is actually a crime called fraud. I am sure that this is also a crime under Dutch law and that the Dutch Law enforcement should investigate this?
Why yes! (Now why didn't *I* think of that?) Yes, by all means, let's take a violation of contractual terms between two private parties and turn it into a law enforcement matter. And
I am not sure what you mean, maybe you can explain it to me better? When one private person/organization steals another private person/organization's car, it is not theft? When one private party lies, cheats and fraudulently obtains something from another party, it is not fraud? Because why? Because they are "private parties" ? I am so sorry that I am slow in understanding this and than you so much for taking the time to explain this to me Andre
participants (2)
-
ox
-
Ronald F. Guilmette