http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1172656996106&pos=ataglance

Summary: Article suggests that Cybersquatters would be harder to track with Whois Privacy "because their name is not on whois".  Like cybersquatters would actually put their name on whois. This is the whole: "Outlawing guns doesn’t stop bad-guys from obtaining them"  Cybersquatters today use fake whois info and shell companies.  Tomorrow they use shell companies with fake info ‘and’ whois privacy..  what’s the difference?

Communicate with the name’s registrar and ask them for assistance..  more often than not you will get quick traction in smoking these folks out with a friendly email to their registrar. As someone who has to filter through 2000 pieces of spam a day I don’t think whois privacy is such a bad thing.  What I do not like about whois privacy is: "What happens when you place a really valuable name under whois privacy and your nefarious registrar absconds with it or says it’s not yours?"  How do you prove it was yours without a public whois record to announce to the world that you are the owner?  I think the best solution is "Partial Whois Privacy" (PWP) where the email address is ghosted or has to be sent for (from the registrar) through an email responder. The registrant mailing address and phone are visible.  If registrants want further privacy they can ‘voluntarily elect’ to use full whois privacy or incorporate.