NetworkWorld vs. DirectNIC in argument over granting of domains to phishers

[mandy]

Should domain name registrars accept fees from and provide addresses to customers who are quite obviously in the midst of a criminal enterprise?

That’s the pointed question being asked by Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer for security vendor F-Secure, in an open letter to registrars on his blog. And it seems to be a question that's at least worth batting around.

"I know you are in the business of registering domain names for people who need them," Hypponen writes. "However, are you sure you want to let people register any domain name? Even when the name is obviously going to be used for phishing?"...

full article: http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/9540

DirectNIC CEO Sigmund Solares just couldn't help himself; he had to needle me for throwing stones while working in a glass office building … or so he seems to believe...

Solares and I had just finished a phone chat about the matter when I received an e-mail from him that included this little dig:

"Network World let me sign up claiming that I am 'eBay,' " he notes. "Hopefully no one is on the Network World network posing as someone else. Perhaps Network World should start filtering as well."...

full article: http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/9598

[jezebel]

"However, are you sure you want to let people register any domain name? Even when the name is obviously going to be used for phishing?"...

How could the registrar determine if a name is obviously going to be used for phishing ?  They can't block trademarked names from being registered because it would block legitimate registrations such as protest sites.  They can't block common words like signin or login. The only solution would be to manually review each new name.