[nine_k]

Both give you a way to find out the domain's registrar, registration date, transfer status, and administrative contacts like abuse@. Nameserver data can also be somehow useful.

Otherwise, what did you expect the registrar to divulge to you, a random passer-by?

[HeatrayEnjoyer]

As a random passer-by I can look up the registered ownership of any building on the street.

[skissane]

As an Australian, I can look up the ownership of random properties in the US for free. But if I want to do the same for a building on my own street, I have to pay a US$11 fee per a property searched.

The US has a reputation of being a hypercapitalist society, yet they seem to be behind Australia in the descent into hypercapitalism by not (yet) privatising the registration of land titles. [0]

[0] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-12/$2.6-billion-price-ta...

[rswail]

Considering Australia (SA) invented the concept of the Torrens Title which means that we don't have to pay extra to protect a piece of paper, and that the Titles Office has always charged for access to titles, I don't think that this is the "hypercapitalism" hill to die on.

It also means that banks can't sell mortgages out from under their borrowers because all liens and other finanacial liabilities attached to a title are known.

[emmelaich]

Is that hypercapitalism or .. too much state control?

A private industry would be able to maintain the records for next to nothing by advertising or offering related services.

The govt could restrict themselves to ensuring no monopoly.

[cuu508]

Intentionally ot not, it also prevents mass scraping.

[skissane]

It doesn’t because you can negotiate a bulk discount. If you want all the titles, they’ll sell that to you - for a huge fee, but still a big discount off paying for them all individually. So essentially it prevents mass scraping by individuals and small businesses, while posing no real obstacle for megacorps with megabudgets