Slashdot Mirror

I prefer George W. Bush sucks.

They've got .freenet!!!
Woohoo!

Mikael Jacobson

First, http://www.newdom.com/archive has almost-complete archives of the original IIIA list (also at http://www.iiia.org/lists/newdom) and the most important successors (ar.com and vrx.net/newdom.com).

You may also want to read http://www.newdom.com/archive/iana- meeting.html, about the incident that started the whole thing.

If you want to hear more from the "first group," the lists at http://www.open-rsc.org are still open, and people there continue to boldly beat the dead horse.

The gtld-mou ("second group") site is http://www.gtld-mou.org. You can find the archive to their discussion list at http://www.gtld-mou.org/gtld-disc uss/mail-archive.

The best example of the "third group" can be found at http://www.kenfreed.org. Ken also has a huge collection of useful links (including all of the comments collected by Esther Dyson except mine, for some reason).

The comments to the NTIA are scattered around their website, but start at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ ntiahome/domainname/domainhome.htm.

The name.space people can be found at http://name.space, but in case you happen to be among the 99.999% of the net that can't resolve that name, they're also http://name.space.xs2.net.

And somewhere, I believe there is an archive of all of the crazy ideas of Jeff Williams.

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Name.Space, the leading pioneer and advocate of new generic toplevel domains (gTLDs) in operation since 1996 has hard data on what new TLDs are popular and in demand by people on the net at large.

In 1996, Name.Space began accepting suggestions for new gTLDs from public input, and has moderated the list to the present number of 549, from thousands of requests. These gTLDs came into operation between the autumn of 1996 and the present and are currently available for registration.
Register here!

Here are the top 20 new gTLDs suggested by the public and presently in operation by Name.Space:

web .
space.
shop.
art.
sex.
info.
zone.
music.
firm.
design.
media.
travel.
online.
arts.
inc.
x.
mail.
home.
family.
2000.
bank.
usa.
news.
ltd.
world.
fuck.
mag.
corp.
direct.
law.
free.
love.
auction.
sale.
casino.
service.
games.
fun.
mall.
studios.
cam.
market.
asia.
sports.
cafe.
mad.
internet.
hacker.
city.
network.

see Vote for new gTLDs
and Name.Space active gTLDs.

In an early effort to gain the global recognition of the new gTLDs serviced by Name.Space, a letter was sent to Network Solutions on March 11, 1997 requesting the addition of the gTLDs serviced by Name.Space and their associated nameservers into the ROOT.ZONE file (the recognized master list of globally-routed TLDs, controlled by NSI).

NSI refused the request to amend the ROOT.ZONE file and Name.Space subsequently filed an ANTITRUST action against NSI on March 20, 1997.

After more than three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals ruled against Name.Space and in favor of NSI, granting NSI IMMUNITY from antitrust prosecution, for their "conduct in this case". The court's decision was an obvious POLITICAL decision, not a legal one. (see http://namespace.org/law)

In the original complaint, Name.Space also listed a group of "non-party co-conspirators", many of whom, or their associates now make up ICANN and the key influential persons surrounding the ICANN process and formerly known as the IAHC (International Ad Hoc Committee) at the time the initial lawsuit was filed in March, 1997.

Now that NSI has been declared IMMUNE from antitrust prosecution for refusing to allow competitors, including Name.Space, to add new TLDs to the root, NSI presents the addition of new TLDs as if it was their idea in the first place--in light of the fact that Name.Space and others were denied precisely what NSI is carving out for themselves.

Why did James Tierney close down the DoJ's antitrust investigation into NSI and their parent company SAIC without finding any wrongdoing? Perhaps you should all write to Mr. Tierney at the DoJ and ask why the US Government is protecting NSI, while crusading against Microsoft? Is this another case of "selective enforcement"? Who is benefiting financially from all of this? Why is there no oversight into conflicts of interest within ICANN? How did NSI get away with paying public relations "flacks" and other "shills" to disrupt, discredit, and coerce their competitors such as Name.Space, with such impunity?

The addition of new gTLDs to the root is a matter of a simple TEXT EDIT of the ROOT.ZONE file. Isn't it about time that this be done without further delay? Get a head start--if you are an ISP you can run the expanded ROOT.ZONE file today by downloading it and installing it on your DNS servers. For more info, see go to Switch to Name.Space

Such a system has existed for years. It's called Name.Space.

Name.Space makes an expanded root.zone file available for those who wish to run it, and info on how to switch one's local DNS settings to resolve more than 500 newTLDs in addition to the "legacy" TLDs.

Name.Space has also created the most powerful domain search engine available, Smart Whois (sWhois) located at http://swhois.net and http://DNS411.com.

The refusal to add the new TLDs to the root amounts to censorship. John Gilmore once said "The internet sees censorship as damage and routes around it". Those for DNS freedom should see ICANN and NSI as "damage" (censorship) and should route around it by switching to Name.Space!.

Such a system has existed for years. It's called Name.Space.

Name.Space makes an expanded root.zone file available for those who wish to run it, and info on how to switch one's local DNS settings to resolve more than 500 newTLDs in addition to the "legacy" TLDs.

Name.Space has also created the most powerful domain search engine available, Smart Whois (sWhois) located at http://swhois.net and http://DNS411.com.

The refusal to add the new TLDs to the root amounts to censorship. John Gilmore once said "The internet sees censorship as damage and routes around it". Those for DNS freedom should see ICANN and NSI as "damage" (censorship) and should route around it by switching to Name.Space!.

Such a system has existed for years. It's called Name.Space.

Name.Space makes an expanded root.zone file available for those who wish to run it, and info on how to switch one's local DNS settings to resolve more than 500 newTLDs in addition to the "legacy" TLDs.

Name.Space has also created the most powerful domain search engine available, Smart Whois (sWhois) located at http://swhois.net and http://DNS411.com.

The refusal to add the new TLDs to the root amounts to censorship. John Gilmore once said "The internet sees censorship as damage and routes around it". Those for DNS freedom should see ICANN and NSI as "damage" (censorship) and should route around it by switching to Name.Space!.