The legal basis is that there are no stronger requirements as "there has to be somebody listed" made by the registry for the TLD, which is a (more-or-less, depending on the case) private entity and can set those rules, within the ICANN guidelines.
more theoretical: Why shouldn't it be allowed?
Building ownership or IP can also be done "privately" through companies. I bet many people owning domains are thankful that their personal information is NOT so easily accessible, and if there is a strong public need (legal case, prosecution) the intermediaries will hand out the information. Where required they'll also forward messages they are sent.
FWIW, here in Germany it is harder to do so and I don't like it, because it connects my website to myself a bit too easily, and I don't even publish particularly critical stuff.
What need do you have that is more important than the rights of the owner?
Additionally as you pointed out by linking my previous post, I find it very questionable that the same company that charges people to hide their domain (and host them), can then also charge people to backdoor communicate with those same sellers. This seems like a shady business practice.
I didn't comment on the other point because I don't know enough about how both involved offers look like exactly.
Building permits and trademarks are required to be public. Other records are not required.
Consider corporate ownership. Some US states allows anonymous corporate ownership. (See http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/10/09/its-time-to... complaining about such companies.) If it's okay to own a company without that information being public, then why not a domain?
Such companies are used as shell companies. If you want to trademark a name but not have others know that it's you, then start a Nevada LLC, owned by a Delaware LLC, owned by a company registered in the Cayman Islands, owned by you, and have the Nevada company take out the trademark.
Also, the term you want is 'hidden from the public' not 'hidden from the public domain.' "Public domain" applies to, for example, works that were under copyright but are no longer so.
Because domains are finite and hold more importance to a business than an actual business name does and by allowing private registration it encourages various entities to sit on the domain indefinitely and prevent others from creating value with it.
I use private registration on a few of my domains to avoid unnecessary harassment.
The fundamental one is your insistence on "value." Where is that requirement? How do you define value? If I want 'dalke-email.com' as an email for me and my friends, without a web server or any attached business, then is that sufficient value? What about 'dalke-cat.com', a memorial site in memory of my cat - if a business wants the name, does it get priority over a site that no one else visits?
Assume I have a new-born child named 'Kelly', and buy the domain name 'kellydalke.com', so that I can transfer it a a birthday present in 18 years. Is that value? To you, no, but to me, absolutely yes.
How should the arbitration organization determine things? If your stealth-mode company takes too long to be public, can your domain name be taken away because it hasn't yet contributed value?
So now I have to decide between a .tv or .io domain (or hey I can use .rocks, .world, .xyz!!!)
Do you think it is too risky to keep a name for a social startup (that has big potential) when the .com is taken? if it gets funded and gains traction, is there more of a chance of acquiring the domain down the line?
One of my co-founders says he thinks that registering it after the fact won't have much affect but who knows. Also, the defunct public relations company that had the same name appears to not be in business and hasnt been for at least ~4-5 years...