[ikken]

I still struggle to understand why we need to have a real address of domain's owner publicly assigned to WHOIS data. The registrar knows the owner so it is available to law enforcement if lawfully necessary. Owners can also use SSL certificate to show their address if they need to. But why force them to make it always public?

[adventured]

There is no good reason, it's a legacy system from a time when the Web was a tiny place with systems designed for academia.

The real reason it still exists as is, is because the registrars make money off of an artificially manufactured benefit. They're selling air at an infinite mark-up. And they're the ones that will fight to keep the status quo.

A registrar the size of GoDaddy must earn tens of millions annually in nearly pure profit off of WHOIS privacy fees.

[compbio]

It is useful to look at countries which require that you identify yourself if you want to sell stuff online.

For commercial sites in Germany a "Web Imprint" (Impressum) is required by law. This "Web Imprint" has to be on a prominent, easy to reach position on the site. It lists the contact data for the owner(s) of the website.

Making anonymously-run webshops against the law shields the consumer against fraud and always gives non-law enforcement a place of contact to file their complaints.

Check for yourself the correlation between WHOIS protected/anonimized webshops and shady business.

[blfr]

If they already have to feature a prominent web imprint, what does anyone gain from an entry in an obscure (to most web users) whois database? An entry that the registrar will happily cover with their own info for a small fee.