Internet User Privacy On The Line With New Proposal In another case of While Americans Were Distracted, the people who run the internets naming system, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) quietly opened for comment what they are calling a minor proposal that would allow those searching for information on site owners to by-pass the proxies set up to protect identities and get a hold of confidential information without a court order. Individuals and businesses are currently allowed to hide their identity, physical location and other personal contact information behind proxies in the public WHOIS directory that stores information online about the owners of every registered website domain name. Proxies can be used by anyone registering a domain, from a lawmaker gearing up for a presidential run who does not want to tip off the press, to a blogger posting unpopular views online. The proxy service comes standard with many of the major domainregistrarslike GoDaddy. What the proposal will do is eliminate proxies for commercial enterprises. And that has a lot of internet companies, and those with a stake in the traditional anonymity of online activities, uneasy about what this new rule could mean. Critics of the potential change argue commercial activity will be impossible to define in a way that does not sweep up many other vulnerable populations that rely on anonymity. It will curb economic activity by adding untenable risk to using a website to promote ones business or to collect donations, and may even add this risk to hosting ads, according to comments by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and dozens of other groups. According to a widely published piece, what prompted this rule proposal was actually a concern over piracy. This change is being pushed by US entertainment companies, who told Congress in March that privacy for domain registration should be allowed only in limited circumstances. These and other companies want new tools to discover the identities of website owners whom they want to accuse of copyright and trademark infringement, preferably without a court order. Not that there is anything wrong with entertainment companies suing internet pirates for the royalties of their copyrighted material, but since they have the money to afford lawyers, they should request subpoenas just like everyone else. Their request is fine for their industry, but in other walks of life, to leave anonymous commenters and bloggers open to real threats on their lives and livelihoods presents a right to privacy quandary. How much privacy should the owners of public information domains have? It is a complex question that will require time and honesty to work through. What is encouraging about concern over this rule is that internet libertarians took to their email lists and circulated a letter asking their followers to comment to ICANN about the proposal as the period of public comment allows. Over 11,000 people took advantage, when most things ICANN proposes see next to nothing during the comment period. The fight is not over and the government agency with loose control over the matter is being coy about the rules purpose and effect, but if nothing else, those 11,000 people got ICANN to understand that even in the midst of damage done by the Supreme Court and drum beats to erase an entire time period from history, someone is always watching. 