Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NSI Modifies "whois" Agreement

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the again dept.

drwiii writes "Our good friends at NSI have modified their WHOIS agreement yet again, and it now seems to forbid any repackaging of the results returned from the query, even if your interest is not commercial. Also, notice how the agreement now appears before any results are returned. " I noticed it says "significant portion", but it also never really defines it, either...

2 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Grr by sjames · · Score: 4

    It broke my scripts. All I want to do is find out if a name is taken already before I allow a user to proceed thinking all is well.

    I'll bet that's the idea, only they are targeting the new registrars who might want to automate the process of registration.

    The biggest mistake in breaking NSI's monopoly was that they got to retain the actual root servers and the whois database. IMHO, the whois database should be regarded as a public record like the property records are.

    Each registrar should be REQUIRED to have at least two root servers located on different networks, and a complete copy of the whois database. Whois updates and new DNS entries should be circulated like a newsfeed between the registrars. Each registrar should be assigned a night or nights where they circulate the entire contents of their databases so that consistancy can be checked and maintained. Database feeds should be provided free of charge to any and all who want the feed (provided they have the pipe to handle the data, 1200 baud users need not apply) as a REQUIRED public service.

    This might be an example of what a Geek Union would be good for. "We have already cached the root servers. Open the whois databases or we'll all switch to new root servers and lock you out".

  2. NSI Agreement by dattaway · · Score: 4

    I didn't pay NSI $70 for my address to become their property. I wanted a service to distribute my information in a freely available manner. When I submitted my information to them with credit card number, in no way did they claim it was their property and they would restrict its availability. This negates the whole rationale behind my domain name. What we have here is a monopoly and they should be bypassed. But, who has the servers and money to handle their capacity? Its evil and needs to be stopped.