According to German law every website who is owned and operated by a person or entity in Germany needs an imprint with full name, address, email address and phone number… (of the owner 2 owning entity)…
a) This is only for commercial websites although what counts as commercial is vague and probably not something you want to argue in court so it's safer to just add it unless you are absolutely sure.
b) You need a valid postal address where you can receive mail but this doesn't have to be your home address. A PO box is fine.
c) You don't need to have a phone number in your Imprint.
The base requirement of commercial operations having to have valid contact information (that can be used for legal communication) is pretty sensible. The details could be a bit friendlier towards individuals running purely personal sites.
So this in practice is a massive push to centralization: if you have a Facebook page or Instagram account, you don't need to risk that level of privacy compromise.
At the same time, expecting that your NAP info isn't already in the hands of anyone who wants it makes no sense in this day and age.
Between the countless DB leaks and numerous infostealer campaigns, and considering that anyone who has you in their contacts list is extending the exposed surface area, it's untenable. Other events like marriage and home ownership further complicate any attempt to keep your name and address private.
Not saying you shouldn't opt for domain privacy, just giving a reality check. To really enforce your privacy you have to have multiple phone lines and a shell company, at the least. And really, even that isn't enough unless you can also commit to being a hermit.
There is a tangible difference between some people having this data somewhere out there, and literally anyone who wants to have it being able to look it up in a few seconds using tools already installed on almost every computer anywhere.
The ability to look up the correct contact details for a commercial enterprise on that enterprise's website is a good thing imo. It is (or was) part of the EU requirements for commercial websites (anything selling, giving purchase advice, advertising, ...).
It's a useful filter, a seller without identifiable people and location is a big red flag.
Exactly. All their info was scraped long ago. Whois and abuse info, it all needed to be depreciated a few decades ago. But, pity the poor fool who actually contacts me. I treat them like regular scammers. Get all the info, and then tell them to pound dirt.
Except for the guy who tried to sell me annuity liquidation. Yes, if the person gets unalived earlier than expected, you win.
In related news, I saw someone buy $150 worth of lottery tickets, as I was on the way to a large hospital to visit a sick friend. The lottery guy I am sure lost, and the hospital guy (profit-care) won, while the ward was understaffed( a profit-center). And 7 out of 8 fare collection machines were out of order ( deferred maintenance as a profit-center). I get the distinct feeling that corporate America, just does not even care in the slightest.
For the organization that managed the WhoIs? The horse left the barn so long ago, it's great great great grand-children are old and gone. Long gone.
Laws are crazy. The CAN SPAM act requires you to publish a physical mailing address in the email you send. It was an anachronism even when it was originally passed -- who wants to unsubscribe to email via physical mail? And yet it's still there, for no reason.
you just have to have enough money to have some legal entity register on your behalf and that legal entity then has their system spammed, but they have their phone public anyhow...
the idea is to have individuals accountable while not annoying owners.
in that sense it makes _perfect_ sense and works as intended.
a proper solution ingredient would be trustworthy and affordable pseudonymity, and that can be lifted by court orders only. but then who guarantees the independence of courts? and the fairness of laws?
