Slashdot Mirror
ICANN Sneaks In Reserved Names For Existing TLDs
"But, under everybody's noses, ICANN has recently snuck in some name exclusions for the existing TLDs, com, net and org. This was hidden in the revised agreements between ICANN and Verisign. See this page in ICANN's site (this is from the com agreement, but similar provisions are in the other two).
Among things that are excluded from use as second level domains are all one and two letter names, all names that are the same as another TLD (both the existing ones and the group like museum that's planned for debut this year), and, most questionably, various names and acronyms relating to ICANN, IANA, and other Internet governing organizations, including aso, dnso, pso, ietf, and ripe. No other organizations in the world yet have the power to ban their names or acronyms from use in all TLDs (though many are clamoring for these powers), but ICANN and IANA have taken this right in a bald power grab, stopping the many other entities in the world whose initials happen to match these from having a right to try to obtain sensible domain names for themselves.
These exclusions apply only to new registrations, not renewals, so the many existing domain names that violate these exclusions will be allowed to continue so long as they don't lapse for nonpayment or get cancelled by a domain dispute panelist's decision.
I have more domain name information and commentary in my site."
Ok..This could be a troll...or it might not be. First of all, you either cleverly left out, or just didn't know , That ruling was later over-ruled by a higher court. Due to profits from a addresss which a domain name is...It is infact property. -tmm
Microsoft sells rights to keywords tied into the IE addressbar through a front organization called RealNames. Netscape has a similar system. Both have been online for many years -- the whitehouse(.com) trick stopped working long ago.
The fact that everyone here is fussing over foo.COM or foo.INC or foo.CX just shows how overly nerdy people are. It's actually easier for the masses (the asses) to type "foo" into the addressbar and let the browser's search/keyword function figure it out. But since you guys are so old skool, you've been typing full domain names and haven't figured it out yet.
To suggest that it would be No Big Deal to setup a competiting DNS system is bunk. You do realize that the top level DNS server handles over 1 million queries a second?
Yeah, I have a 486 box running Linux 2.0.38 which I can donate. We only need about 100,000 more of them and we're set.
Actually, Scotland has already had this debate. It's true that .sc is taken and so is .ca (for Caledonia), but most people seem to be agreed that .aa would be okay- the old Gaelic name for Scotland was "Alba".
The problem with your [1] and so forth is that it requires the cooperation of the people running the DNS servers. Unless you happen to dial into an organization that has a supportive person in charge of DNS, it won't happen.
I advocate the solution of subverting the hierarchy by standing on top of it. Quick example: you want to create a TLD called blah, and a domain called slashdot inside of it. So, you configure the root of blah as ex1.com and ex2.com. What happens now?
Your resolver remaps all queries for blah TLD entries and appends either ex1.com or ex2.com (balancing the load), and then passes it along. Your ISP's name servers see a query for slashdot.blah.ex1.com and do the usual thing with it.
This attacks the problem from the *client* side, so there is no expectation or need for the server operators to change. Also, anyone can create any alternate TLD, since it's just a matter of convincing people to use your set of supporting domains instead of someone else's.
So if I change my name to France Sucks, do you think they'd let me in the country?
Actually it's not the country that sucks, it's the people. But don't take my word for it. Go there with an open mind and find out for yourself.
In addition to that, let's pass a law that says you must build on land within 60 days of purchase. There are an infinite number of domain possibilities. You have to be creative...
Got two things for ya.
One - you cant register TLDs, only SLDs within TLDs..
Second, 'hosting content on a hostname' within a domain is not the only use of a domain. WWW != Internet.
It is perfectly legitimate to register a domain to use for naming hosts providing a variety of services, none of which include http service on any host named 'www'
True, many domains are truly not in use, but defining as use as 'hosting content' is incorrect.
But then again, why Is Nissan Motors entitled to that name anyway?
They're not and that's why they don't have it, Nissan Computer Services in North Carolina does. However, Nissan Motors has appx two and a half shitloads of lawyers so they will wield them like a hammer and pummel that poor Jew fellow who owns Nissan Computing Services.
"uselessness of 1-letter names" Actually once the United States catches up the with rest of the world's grasp of WAP 1 letter names would probably be the most sought after names on the market. Imagine how much easier JAne and Joe Handheld Device user would go to your site if they only had to enter 1-2 letters.
The Internet Domain system was never intended to be used as a keyword system. That's why Netscape and Microsoft built search and keyword capabilities right into their address bar interface. Your hypothetical index has been there from the very beginning, and it's called Yahoo (etc).
We need:
[1] a new set of root servers (easy).
[2] copy all existing TLD and SLD info to these servers (time consuming/expensive but possible)
[3] set policy. "First come, first serve." (that's it. done.)
[4] Convince big name ISPs to point to these root servers. (extremely difficult)
Do you want:
- Nissan Computers
- Nissan Motors
Same for anything else. sunsetmotel.com (I just made that up) would be an index to all the Sunset Motels in the world. If there are 15 legitimate contender, it's better to have an index, than to have one winner and people who can't find the address of the Sunset Motel they have in mind.
That's why I prefer an index like Google with some editorial power. Compare a helpful index with the winner of a stupid URL war.
Downplay ICANN! Use search engines and private indexes!
- A.P.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Norway (.no) has it this way. One domain for you; provided, of course, that you're a registered corporation/organization. Also, the name you register has to be derived from the name of your organization, i.e. shortened, full, acronymized etc. Makes you wonder about por.no ..
Yeah, who's ever heard of big Asian industrial conglomerates making cars and computer gear.
Ignoring the likes of Hyundai and Daewoo, ofcourse.
...j
What happens when two companiesvie for the same name?
This bothers me because then the 'big boys' woulds decide with copyright holder is entitled to teh domain. Case in point, Nissan.com run by Nissan Computer services, but Nissan Motors wants it, too.
Under the old system, Nissan Computers got it becuase he was there first, and because he has a legal right to the name. Under the new system, I guarantee that Nissan.com ( dot-whatever) would go to Nissan Motors without any sort of consideration. This a a Bad Thing.
But then again, why Is Nissan Motors entitled to that name anyway? 'Nissan' is not their name, it's Nissan Motors (or something to that effect).
.
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.
Sounds like the Internet community needs better representation. Of course, since ICANN is theoretically representative now (kinda) (sorta), perhaps there's grounds for a malpractice suit, or at least an ethics inquiry.
Dare to dream, I guess.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
The Internet became popular not because some business decided to push it, originally. Businesses were latecoming. It became popular because there were enough people doing enough cool stuff that it attracted everyone else.
What does this have to do with domains and root servers?
If we start using non-ICANN domains for our really cool stuff, the free stuff, and resist the temptation to put anything more than instructions on how to get to the cool stuff (e.g. change your resolver hosts) on legacy TLDs, then it can more quickly build up a following.
If the .mp3 domain gets going soon, how long do you think it will take the RIAA to be using alternate domains?
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Actually, this has been relaxed a bit lately. You still have to be a registered corp/org, but you can have several domains (I can't find any limit in the current docs), and the domain names don't have to relate to the organization name.
Regarding por.no, it was reserved, together with a bunch of other names (such as city, county and other geographical names (which are used as third level domains, previously for businesses based in those areas, you had to have national presence to get an SLD). The reserved list shrunk significantly during the relaxation of the rules, ee the list
of reserved names.© 2000 Ilmari. All ritghts reserved, all wrongs reversed
© ilmari. All rights reserved, all wrongs reversed
I wish there was a "-1 Naive", or "-1 Fantasy", moderation -- this poster fits the bill.
~dlb
This is Slashdot. We don't even permit you to read the article before posting.
How would you define legitiamte use? Is this: http://www.orangepurple.com/? I register the name, but I just don't know what I'm going to do with it yet. Am I a bad person?
This just *screams* out for some outside-the-box thinking.
First, let's all agree on some not-necessarily-human-friendly universal description of what things are (incorporating D&B #s or whatever), something that you and only you can and should have and that computers and people can use when they must refer to precisely you across arbitrary contexts.
For everyday usage, let's build computers that "do the right stuff". For instance, if I type http://coke the machine should present me with visual images of a can of soda and a lump of coal, the default selected by the current context. (Was I previously searching for minerals? Was I previously searching for entertainment or food?)
Everybody in the world will ultimately come up with their own personal names for a few things, and other things will come together "by convention", just like real life!
Y'reckon?
That's ridiculous. One of my own domains sends and recieve thousands of emails a day, but has nothing "hosted on it" if you're referring to HTTP... On the other hand, one of my other domains DOES have something "hosted on it" but consume far less bandwidth because it's almost never visited.
I'm not squatting on either of them, and as far as I can tell, nobody would have any right to snatch them back off me, regardless of whether or not I have "something hosted on it".
Nick Waterman, Sr Tech Director, #include <stddisclaimer>
Um, wait a second...
actually it is free to register something like city.state.us but you need to be authorized by that city to handle the domain. after that city.state.us is delegated, you can charge whatever you want. the nic.us site says this (or used to)
so its not always free...
-=[ http://www.legos.org ]=-
http://www.paradigm.nu/icann/icannstage.html
And a Reg story here:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/18530.html
Easily enough arranged. Home address, please?
Only American LIBERALS use the terms "offensive," "abusive," etc. Get your politics straight, jerkball.
Hey, according to *Dutch* standards, even American liberals are very conservative.
Thank you for exactly pointing out what I meant: there are other viewpoints in the world than the American ones, but it seems hard for some Americans to accept that this mere possibility even exists..
-- Nothing is as subjective as reality --
"In the ongoing and contentious debate over new Top Level Domains, one flamewar-provoking issue has been whether certain names ought to be reserved as second (or higher) level domains within new TLDs because there's something inherently (or at least potentially) abusive to their use"
Abusive? To American standards? To Muslim standards? To Buddhist standards? Does this mean the entire world has to compy with a view of what is abusive that is typically American?
It is bad enough already that the com/net/org domains fall under American jurisdiction, now we have to comply with American conservatism too...
When will everybody start to realize that the Internet is more International that the United States?
-- Nothing is as subjective as reality --
The whole TLD system needs to be fixed - period.
.whatever won't help, because the system was intitially designed when the internet was relatively small *and* largely corporate free. The TLDs had meanings - .net, .org, .com, .edu, .gov. It's pretty simple to see what those things mean.
.com domain - because companies are allowed to have the same name in the real world as long as they are different types of business. This doesn't work with the current TLD system.
.mtl domain would work for them.
Adding
Then, the internet went global. Now you have every company on the face of the globe competing for the same name in the
To further compound the problem, companies in the same business are allowed to have the same name, provided they don't overlap regions. Restaraunts are a classic example of this. How many differrent cities have a "Grandma's Restaraunt" or "Mom's Kitchen", when none of them are related? So who gets mom.com?
First come, first serve makes sense initially, but the problem is easy to see, and easy to see blow up - which is what happened - when it goes global.
The TLD system needs to be completely revamped to have several different manners of identifying the same business.
1) There should be a geographical notation TLD - sort of a business.city.state/province.country
Ex: momskitchen.newyork.newyork.us and momskitchen.neworleans.louisianna.us
People will adjust to the difference in nomenclature - and it isn't all that complicated. However, this system presents a problem for large multinationals. So, we need to address this. Perhaps a
2) We need to have a business type TLD system - so that Bob's Car Market and Bob's soul kitchen and Bob's spandex emporium all can have a reasonable web address. So businessname.businesstype.country might work for them.
This is the type of stuff that is going to need to be done to fix this problem. It's going to need to be totally revamped in a manner similar to what I have above.
Then, when changing over, give businesses 1 year to grab their web address (since they can no longer claim ignorance to the net) and then put them up for grabs.
Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
What percentage of them are actually used? I'd like to see all TLDs that don't have content hosted on them after, say, 60 days, freed up. Use it or lose it.
.com or .org; I'm certain you meant second level domain.
Two problems here.
1. TLD is a top level domain, like
2. What if people aren't putting web content on them? What if, for example, they are using it as a second level domain specific to a particular non-web service, like email? Some companies have domains dedicated to email, for various (legitimate) reasons.
Get real, will you? I knew Jon Postel - I had a beer with him in Geneva the year he died - and I knew his long and close friendship with Vint Cerf, whom I also know. And Vint is now Senior Vice President for Technology at MCI WorldCom.
One of the things that tied Vint and Jon together (apart from being close friends for thirty years) was that both of them cared passionately about a free and open Internet. Vint still does. You only need to look at his page on Social, Economic and Regulatory Issues to see that. ISOC's slogan 'The Internet is for Everyone' is very much his slogan.
I think everyone agrees that ICANN is a mess - but it's a mess brought about by lawyers (mainly American lawyers), not by the Internet pioneers. Also, and this is what makes me most worried about articles like this one, is that the people who are doing most to damage the concept of a free, open Internet for everyone are not the pioneers - they're the get-rich-quick sleazoids who come in on the back of the pioneer's work and try to grab a chunk of the territory for themselves. We can all see that people who register patents for old and obvious ideas just by tagging 'Internet' onto the end of them are sleazoids. Can you not see that alternate TLD registrar wannabes are also sleazoids?
Yes, ICANN stinks. Yes, we need a more open, democratic authority controlling the top-level domains. But the Internet pioneers are not the enemy, and MCI is not the enemy. And in my opinion, the second thing that needs doing to ICANN (after making it democratic) is to move it out of American legal jurisdiction.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
I do agree with the first two options (although not with the third as I think that is abusing the system badly - maybe Coke will pay ICANN and Verisign to reserve coke.tld in all namespaces in the future (even coke.book or coke.museum or whatever silly TLDs are released) whatever their Trademark covers).
However, if uk.com is accidentally not reregistered, then there will be an awful lot of angry customers of uk.com when their domains stop working. I imagine similar services exist for other countries, de.com? fr.com? eu.com I know exists...
Perfect as Verisign just start their own "uk.com" service using the reserved word because "The domain just wasn't reregistered - your credit card was never authorised (never entered into the terminal more like) - sorry, nothing we can do"...
In the UK, the first two rules already exist, hence there is only one 1 letter domain (x.co.uk), and a few 2 letter domains (bt.co.uk, f9.co.uk) that were allocated before Nominet came in to manage the namespace. It works quite well, and gets rid of confusion. You cannot have gov.co.uk, or nhs.co.uk, or org.co.uk, as the third-level-domain conflicts with an second-level-domain.
they need to speed it up before it will completely take over.
How we know is more important than what we know.
You have to be creative...
Or if you're not feeling very creative, there are more than a hundred interesting possibilities at Peckerheads domain board.
A dingo ate my sig...
There's a difference though. Phone numbers made of letters are not unique, and in fact 1-800-GATEWAY and, say, 1-800-HAVE-WAX would be the same number. So it would really be impossible to consider a phone number a trademark.
Of course, I don't think domain names SHOULD be considered trademarks, but that's how it will be as long as ICANN is in power...
--
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
That's the theory. Here's the reality. Eg, in Australia, the govt passed a law or something that gave the Bradman foundation the exclusive use of the word Bradman in ANY business name in ANY industry.
FYI, Don Bradman was a cricketer. A hero to some. But I don't see how they could claim any company with that word in their name is scamming off the foundation.
Now when you talk about someone as big as Coca Cola, I'm sure they have enough $ to convince the judge that coke.net is rightfully theirs to use as a coke fan network...
---
It's not just x.com and x.org. Q.com is registered to Qwest Communications, and z.com is registered to Nissan North America. I'm pretty sure both used to belong to other organizations. Wasn't z.com a magazine of some sort?
It's official now, but a few years ago a company had it and was taking advantage of consumer confusion to pass through domain registrations to the real Internic (whose site was at www.internic.net) at a large markup. Presumably, some of these exclusions are designed to prevent that sort of fraud.
Because InterNIC... or more acurately, Network Solutions, Inc... or still more acurately, Verisign has in their service agreement that you do not own a domain that you register with them... they do. So it is in their best interest to just keep all the domains they can. They'll probably auction them off. So, in other words, don't use networksolutions.com... use register.com or someone else.
--
--
"What do you want me to do? Whack a guy? Off a guy? Whack off a guy? Cause I'm married."
Well, the problem is that the DNS system is going to be 100x more important when the switch to IPv6 is made because the addresses are much more unweildy than IPv4.
--
--
"What do you want me to do? Whack a guy? Off a guy? Whack off a guy? Cause I'm married."
Lisa: "Who's going to police the police?"
Homer: "I dunno, Coast Guard?"
-----
"Defenestration" is to throw out of a window; what's a word for throwing 'Windows' out of something?
"First come, first serve" is the fundamental principle of trademark law in every country (that has it), so it is quite ironic to claim that the two are in conflict.
You can put a big sign on your shop saying 'Nissan', but that doesn't mean signwriting is fundamentally in conflict with trademark law in most countries. You can put ads in your local newspaper calling your business 'Nissan', but that doesn't mean a free press is fundamentally in conflict with trademark law in most countries. You can put a up a website which describes itself as 'The official Nissan Home Page', but that doesn't mean the world wide web is fundamentally in conflict with trademark law in most countries.
The purpose of trademark law is to prevent counterfeiters passing themselves off as, say, 'Nissan Cars'. The purpose of the DNS system is to ensure the same domain always points to the same organisation, so if you go to www.linux.com you can expect to read about an operating system and not a washing powder. These functions are quite different and should remain separate. Merging them, as you propose, would be impossible precisely because of international differences in trademark law.
Ask me if I've been required to disclose any crypto keys.
>I think it is reasonable for a domain name that contains a trademarked word within X levels of a TLD to be reserved for that trademark holder. Why not?
.com, .org, and .net, not to mention the proposed new TLDs.
I think it is very unreasonable. A domain name like 'oxford' should not be banned because it contains the word 'ford'. Even for domain names which are trademarks, it is common for several entities to register the same trademark. And trademark registries are national, so this would not be relevant to crucial domains like
Ask me if I've been required to disclose any crypto keys.
You used Nissan in an example of how first come first served conflicts with trademark law. Nissan the car company is currently suing Nissan Computers over the nissan.com address. Now let's be clear - Nissan computers (a family name) registered their company according to all legal guidelines, started a computer business, later added the nissan.com web site and registered the nissan.com url. According to trademark law - they have every right to it. Because there's allowed to be a Nissan computer, Nissan cars, Nissan beverage company, etc. as long as they're in separate industries. But how does this fit into the tld system already in place? It doesn't. There is total conflict. Two (or more likely 15, 20, more) companies have the 'right' according to trademark law to register companyname.com. But there's only one url. Who gets it? Trademark law offers no guidelines on this.
.kids, etc). What guided them? Who knows?
The only solution that could bring tlds into alignment with tradmark law is if ICANN were to issue a tld for each industry - so that you could have a nissan.car, nissan.computer, nissan.beverage, etc. without creating conflict between the companies. This is in fact ICANN's job - they exist to create new tlds. Well.... we're still waiting for them. They finally agree to a very small number, decide on them with unknown rules, and approve ZERO of the useful new ones (.xxx,
First come first served DOESN'T work, but the only solution i see to ending the url conflict with trademark law is a flood of new tlds, one per industry, that ICANN has absolutely and unconsionably refused to perform. So the first come first served rule is bad, yes. But a slew of new root operators are necessary. One of the new commercial ventures exploring this is planning a browser plug-in to allow users to see their sites - so much more user friendly than manually configuring DNS options. I think AlterNic, et al. should explore this option as well.
Why not use the tld to distinguish? So that the multiple companies with a similar name can still get web addresses?
Why can there only be Nissan.com, and not nissan.car, nissan.computer, nissan.personal, etc?
Oh.... because ICANN won't get off their ass and approve a slew of new tlds to allow making these?
It is unreasonable to give major corporations first dibs on names in TLDs unrelated to their primary area of business.
I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
In general, with the exception of certain 'famous marks', a trademark applies only to one specific market.
I may hold the trademark for "Ferret's Bookstore", but that would only give me ownership of the domain "ferret.books" , not first dibs on "ferret.com" or "ferret.shop" or "ferret.xxx".
Before suggesting that an international organization take pains to protect American trademerks, first consider the definition of a "trade" "mark", and how a registration for a specific term used for a specific market in a specific locality applies to a global naming system.
I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
Why should they take away all 1- and 2-letter names? I can somewhat see the uslessness of 1-letter names (but having one would be very sweet), but two-letter names could definitely have some use. They say that they are trying to avoid confusion with established country codes, but why not reserve just country codes then, not everything?
...people and organizations that cannot stand a bit of humor and fun. This is what that is. If no-one can register icann-sucks.com then no-one can make fun of them, right? Wrong! This is a call-to-arms! Spoof them now! Let them know that we will not stand for this desperate grab to appear legitimate!
Or we could just sit back and do nothing. Because, this is not that important or anything.
Ciao.
nahtanoj
Claim your namespace.
With regard to your points:
[1] a new set of root servers (easy).
Done. Several such already exist. OpenNIC, AlterNIC, ORSC, TINC to name just a few. All of these are operating right now.
[2] copy all existing TLD and SLD info to these servers (time consuming/expensive but possible)
Not necessary. They can have .com, .net, .org and the new ones, as well. All we have to do is have the new root servers delegate the legacy TLDs to the ICANN/NSI servers. So ICANN does not cease to exist, it simply becomes one of many. It becomes subject to COMPETITION. People will be able to vote with their feet. In fact, people are alreasy beginning to do so!
[3] set policy. "First come, first serve." (that's it. done.)
Not so simple. Generic TLDs should be first-come first served. There should also be a place for chartered TLDs, though, like the existing .edu. OpenNIC is mostly focussed on chartered TLDs, while the other alternate roots seem to have mostly generic TLDs. Rules and regulations pertaining to domain name ownership and rights and priority should be decided on a per-TLD basis, at the time of that TLD's incorporation into the root.
[4] Convince big name ISPs to point to these root servers. (extremely difficult)
That's the trick, allright. I think this will happen in stages. Stage 1 will be early adopters, mostly people who feel like they have a stake in the way the DNS is operated and who are fairly technically savvy. This is where we are now, with probably less than 20000 users of all the alternate roots combined. Stage 2, I think, will be when some of the free OS distros begin to include alternate DNS as an install option. Probably Debian, Slackware and the *BSD people will be first. This will bring in a ton more users. This may be less than a year away. We at OpenNIC have had discussion with people involved in some of these OS projects. Nothing has been decided, but positive noises have been made. At some point a critical mass will be reached. The alternate TLDs will begin to have enough content so that joe earthlink user will begin to call support and ask why he can't visit www.good.beer or something. This will be stage3, when the ISPs begin to come on board. At that point the revolution will have suceeded.
So get on the bandwagon early. Join up now!
Claim your namespace.
I ate my sig.
When dealing w/ legal contracts such as this, nothing is hidden from the two sides making the deal. They've both been over the contract many times w/ a fine tooth comb.
Apparently someone thought it was a small enough concession to allow the contract to go through... me thinks you should join ICANN and complain there... Hate to break it to you, but complaining on /. might not be all that helpful
I ate my sig.
I sorta got into the whole domain thing early on, and got "e.co.za" for myself. There's no chance of finding single letter domain names, since only a few second level domains are created for za (South Africa). The control is (thankfully) quite strict here.
had a nice ring to it...
Nice as a personal e-mail domain, yes?
I'm not domain squatting or anything like that, and don't think I will *ever* sell it.
Just thout I'd brag.
Share and Enjoy.
there are resolver libraries which search relative to a default domain suffix, and which remove one component of that suffix at a time until they get to the root. for example, a user at a.b.tld might be trying to look up foo.bar, but his resolver would first try foo.bar.a.b.tld then foo.bar.b.tld, then foo.bar.tld, then (finally) foo.bar.
.store, by populating that com.store domain with bogus entries made to fool folks using .com. for instance, www.cnn.com.store could point to a fake www.cnn.com web site (perhaps a mirror of the real cnn.com site with different advertisements).
so someone who owned (say) com.store could screw everybody whose default domain ended in
ideally of course resolvers wouldn't do this.
but there are a lot of broken implementations out there, and its easier to fix this with ICANN policy than it is to update all of those broken resolver implementations.
If you can't trust the police, who do you get to police them, right?
Lisa - "Dad, don't you see you're abusing your power like all vigilantes? I mean, if you're the police, who will police the police?"
Homer - "I dunno. Coast Guard?"
New TLDs could start off with domains priced at some very high price (say, $10 million each), with a 10% price cut every day until $10 is reached, about six months after start. Now that would be a market.
Why not just throw in "puppy kickers vs noble citizens" while you're at it? the range of suggested exclusions looks like it spans the whole spectrum of entrenched, new, corporate, civic and public health concerns and definitly some would favor a "more" free and open internet than others. To put the whole range short of internet anarchist (those who prefer an anarctic internet, not a political appalation) as "intrenched interests" and the "no rules except first comes first served" crowd as moderates is just insulting to the intelligence of your readers.
yeah, /. has an agenda, and I know that when I come here, but could you lay the propaganda a little less thick next time? Some people want lots of limits. some want a few, some want a different few. You want none. Don't let your position blind you to the existance of a range outside of it, it just makes you look foolish.
Kahuna Burger
...will work for Chick tracts...
"There should be a geographical notation TLD - sort of a business.city.state/province.country"
.com domain, not a .nj.us domain. What we need to do is have it enforced.
This already exists! It's just that everyone wants a
Anyone who 'claims ignorance to the net' should have their business license revoked and the owners shot.
Peace,
Amit
ICQ 77863057
[o]_O
I currently use the domains I have but I don't see a problem with selling "non-trademarked" domains.
Why type full domain names?
.com for you.
When using IE, type the name, then press ctrl-enter and it'll add the www. and
Us nerdy old skool guys still know a few tricks.
Cheerio,
Link
That woulnd't be so hard. If anyone managed to set up an alternate network of DNS servers (I hope so), all it would take is on official domain name (say freenames.org). If someone on the altnet registered www.linux.oss, then we could say that linux.oss.freenames.org would point to that site. It would be a longer URL, but anyone could get to the other sites. We should have a more open organization in control of the domain names, and one way to get that is to force the current organization out of the game.
They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
Yeah, but get 1-800-ITS-UNIX and AT&T will be all over your ass. :-/
--
--
We have fought the AC's, and they have won.
--
--
We have fought the AC's, and they have won.
I couldn't agree with your suggested sollution more. Of course, most of the truly technical people at all the ISPs would probably fall on the right side of this issue, so doing this subversively at first is probably doable if only we could organize everyone necessary. The rub lies in the companies who provide the actual physical circuits -- the MCIs and Sprints of the world. When the suits and their lawyers get wind of this quiet revolution, they'd have the plug pulled on the bandwidth to the subversives' machines. I'm all for an open revolt against corporate stupidity and the rebirth of Common Sense. See http://www.inhuman.net for something I found sadly appropriate.
There are two major products that come out of Berkel
This is a blatant abuse of their power and position, and is completely wrong... but to whom are they accountable? As far as I can tell, they're the top of the food chain in this situation. If you can't trust the police, who do you get to police them, right?
There are two major products that come out of Berkel
...When starting a new country, make sure that you don't pick a name that has the first two letters of someone else's country, or you might not be able to get a TLD for it! And then, no digital e-commerce revolution for you!
Depending on where you live, you don't have control over your baby's name either. France has strict laws, so does Norway and maybe Germany.
Can someone explain to me why? Does it have something to do with the multi-lingual domains they want to introduce?
SSL Certificate
In reply, while I dont think its even possible to define 'legitimate use',
Its safe to say if a www.. points to a webpage that says "This domain for sale! Bids starting at $1,000,000" that it is NOT legit.
If the domains main webpage states they only have it to resell it for much more than its worth, it should be revoked.
--Jon
His explanation unfortunately blows it - he _could_ have tried to get away with the subjunctive case instead of a preterite (i.e one which would have been non-past). Colloquially he's in the clear too, but I guess we're not permitting colloquialisms here, are we?
FP.
--
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
I would be perfectly happy if an individual or organization could only register ONE second level domain.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
The topic was relevant to subject matter.
Then everyone (the poorer amongst us) would be left with all the crap names that the rich did not want.
;-)
Also big corporations would be able to price out small businesses with names they share.
It will save WIPO bullying domains from legal owners for them though
WIPO.org.uk
ICANN mentions "aso", "dnso", "icann", "internic" and "pso" as reserved for their own use as second-level domains. But www.aso.com is already "Aircraft Shopper Online", and www.dnso.com is a very nice anti-ICANN site. OK, www.icann.com already belongs to ICANN, and www.internic.com looks pretty official. (www.pso.com, on the other hand, is one of those spartan "under construction" doodads).
(I haven't checked the longer "IANA" list, but there are probably a few of these that are already taken, and not just in .com.)
Anyway, I can see why ICANN might want to shut down the "Gnomes of Zurich" (who claim credit for dnso.com), but what about those poor guys selling aeroplanes? Are they being forced to relocate?
Why wont internic release expired domain names? They have domain that expired a year ago, but won't release them. They suck dick.
who gets mom.com?
Registrant: Mind Over Machines, Inc. (MOM2-DOM) 1300 York Road, Suite 30 Baltimore, MD 21093 US Domain Name: MOM.COM Administrative Contact, Billing Contact: Bafford, Bill (BBU80) bill@MOMINC.COM Mind Over Machines, Inc. 1300 York Road Suite 190 Baltimore , MD 21093 410 321-4700 (FAX) 410 321-4780 Technical Contact: DNS, Charm Net (CND4) dns@CHARM.NET Charm Net, Incorporated 2200 E. Lombard St. Baltimore, MD 21231 (410)558-3900 (FAX) (410)558-3901
yeah, i know. hypothetical. right.
--saint----
that I can't register icanncankissmychairshiner.com? Damn.
</rant mode>
Sorry...just one of those things that annoys me.
-- Chris
-- Chris
$email=~s/[^a-zA-Z0-9@.]//g;
Does this mean I can't register IANAL.com?
Maybe if IWAL (I was a lawyer) I could get away with it.
Tyranny, I tell you! Tyranny!
-- Chris
-- Chris
$email=~s/[^a-zA-Z0-9@.]//g;
-- Chris
-- Chris
$email=~s/[^a-zA-Z0-9@.]//g;
SAME TRADE NAME OK IF YOU DO DIFFERENT THINGS!
SAME TRADE NAME OK IF YOU ARE IN DIFFERENT STATES.
At first, that is. Well-known trademarks are usually protected by the individual states.
In the United States, trademark law is largely state law. That's why Apple Computer, Apple Employment, and Apple Records can coexist. You get into disputes when one goes national followed by another, and there are usually concilliatory measures taken by the newcomer - but they work it out somehow. All of this has nothing to do with the company's market.
A recent development in trademark law is the idea of "dilution" - that a mark can become so commonplace that it loses its market value. Nissan, since they are so well recognized, have a good chance of winning a dilution lawsuit against someone who uses their mark. And, since states generally support well-known marks that originate out of state, Nissan could win if it brought a lawsuit against someone who used their mark unfairly. (That, and Nissan probably has their mark registered in every state.)
The idea that trademarks apply to only one area of business is quite false, and another good reason to have a Slashdot Intellectual Property Law FAQ.
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
[3] set policy. "First come, first serve." (that's it. done.)
The problem with this policy, whether you enforce it under the existing system or another system, is that it is fundamentally in conflict with trademark law in most countries.
So we have this system. So I register nissan.cx. I have a Slashdot-like site for encryption junkies, and I sell hats and shirts with the RSA algorithms on them.
Okay, I get sued by Nissan. What else did I expect? They sue me for unlicensed use of their trademark and trademark dilution. Who wins in court? They do. After all, I was using their well-known mark to further my own business interests.
There's got to be a solution, but "first come first serve" is not it. It will probably require some changes in domain registration, and possibly changes to trademark law, and probably international treaties to make it work. (Trademark law different in different countries, and we have to get them to agree somehow.) Setting up a "first come first serve" DNS system is just asking for lawsuits.
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
Many of these little countries are selling the rights to .xx, while keeping .com.xx, .org.xx, etc., for their own use. Best of both worlds.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
You're on crack.
Look at the stats for one of the better-connected (and hence more-queried) of the 13 root servers. It's receiving about 2.2Mb/second between two interfaces, which - assuming about 100 bytes per request - is 2750 queries per second. Even charitably assuming all the servers get the same load, that's 35,750 queries per second worldwide.
I've run DNS servers almost that busy on $5K boxes. Bandwidth is the bigger issue. Free it ain't, but it's nowhere near the pipe dream you make it.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
I think it is reasonable for a domain name that contains a trademarked word within X levels of a TLD to be reserved for that trademark holder. Why not? That TM holds up in any other media and as much as I love the anarcy of the Internet, these companies have a point and have rights to whatever they may trademark.
But the rules must be precise - no fuzzy "well its CLOSE to our trademark" BS. Either the word/phrase is in the domain and you own the trademark, or you don't and have no rights to it. And if you want to USE the names, you better pay up like the rest of us!
--
Top Most Bizarre/Disturbing Error Messages
Maybe this isn't such a bad thing.
Admittedly it could cause some serious problems while being phased in. You'd be tossing people out of their domains left and right.
Once you were done, once a certain deadline had passed... You could phase out the trademark system and have everything done via domain name. Want to reserve a name? Forget paying a trademark lawyer $375; just reserve a domain name for $12. It's already taken? Darn.
Noisey mouse coward.
Why is this a troll? Everyone would agree with me that I should be able to have scientology_is_for_gays.com
This is Slashdot huh?
Get your Unix fortune now!
This seems to limit my free speech if I can't get a domain like productnamesucks.com .
t .html
Instead of being able to let everyone know about how I hate said product name - which I think is still protected under the first amendment - it has to be under a url like: w3.ispprovider.com/~username/speech/ihatehomedepo
It's BS -- who said I would be using the product name to market something? They've already decided what I intended to do with the name before I used it. I know its not illegal to refer to the product name of what I'm bashing.
Get your Unix fortune now!
A *lot* of ISPs seem to have two-letter domains: he.net, mv.net (my old ISP), wi.com, etc. Apparently, they can hang onto them, but still...
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
suwain_2
Can anyone enlighten me?
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
suwain_2
I just noticed that ripe.org, one of the names that's supposedly restricted from new registration under these exclusions, has just been registered, apparently by an individual in Florida, with a registration date of only a few days ago. See the CheckDomain record. So they don't seem to actually be enforcing these restrictions yet. (And ripe is a particularly silly name to be the subject of a pre-emptive restriction, given that it's a common English word.)
--Dan
--Dan
Web Tips
The Libertarian Party has lp.org.
--Dan
--Dan
Web Tips
Actually that was not the rulling. A Domain name is not property for one part of the case but is for another.
The reason a domain name is not property is that it has no tangible representation. It is not like cash that can be deposited in the court. It is not even like cash in a bank account which is a representation that can be escrowed.
Of course a domain name is a valuable property the way a UK license plate number can be. (A1 resold for over a million dollars a while back). So damages were assesed on that basis.
I agree however that there should be a statute of limitations. Anyone who has not picked up a dot com yet for their trademark should lose the right to grab it from someone who did. That is not where domain name disputes are these days however, there are plenty of secondary names which arguably infringe trademarks (FordTruck.com for example).
Equally a lot of the petty name disputes (gwbush.com) could be solved by simply setting up name spaces that were policed in a reasonable fashion. For example the US government could assign .candidate.gov as a hierarchy for federal election candidates. To register in the hierarchy a person would have to meet certain legitimacy criteria (be standing as a candidate, use their original name or one they have been known by for a certain number of years, etc.).
The point is that there has to be a balance. First come first served does not solve every problem. Johnnie come lately grabs good domain with over priced, under ethical lawyers creates more problems than it solves.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
60 days is a ridiculously short time since many commercial enterprises plan major marketing campaigns months or years in advance. If I am spending $100K on canvasing opinions of six potential product names I think I am doing enough to justify registration in any sane system. However I am not about to go and prove it.
Any system that relies on human judgement is going to end in lawsuits or the rule being ignored. Or most likely as has happened in several country TLDs lawsuits being filled and the rules being dropped.
It is simply not economic for registrars to work for $35 per name under the rules proposed. I don't think people want to pay $200+ for initial registration.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
I'm not sure if they'd pull the plug or not, but it would be a public relations coup for the alternate domain owners if they did. Can you imagine how much of a black eye the backbone providers would get if they did this? But I can't see them doing this. Why should they care what root servers their customers are pointing to? Now, if you mean that management at the various ISPs would pull the plug on this if they found out their admins were doing it, yes, they probably would, and I'm not sure I'd object to that. If I owned an ISP, and I found out that my employees were doing something without my permission, I'd be pretty pissed off about it, especially something as fundamental as redirecting DNS traffic. But the question becomes how to do this without causing mass confusion. IOW, what exactly are you wanting to do? Create new TLDs? Rewrite the rules for existing TLDs? Both? Overthrow ICANN and replace it with something else? Personally, I think that the main danger is that'd we'd end up with a splintered domain naming system and the chaos that would go along with it. Therefore, overthrowing ICANN would probably be the wisest course of action. If we went that route, then the first step is to set up a rival organization. Get some well-respected folks on board and write a charter that Internet users and admins can support. Build the organization up from a grass-roots level and make no bones about what its goal is: to replace ICANN with or without ICANN's support. And don't be shy about what will happen after that. If the new organization intends to repudiate the agreements that ICANN has made with Network Solutions, then say so. If it intends to throw out the current domain name dispute resolution policy, then make that crystal clear. IMHO, these are all things that people hate about the current situation we find ourselves in. Capitalize on that anger. Point out all the things we've grown to hate about ICANN, then put forward an organization that'll fix these problems. Don't go the "underground" route with this. Let everyone know what your intent is. But above all, keep the new organization unified. The one thing that will scare the hell out of people is the possibility that all you're doing is creating chaos.
That light you see at the end of the tunnel might be from an oncoming train.
Getting a personalised response from the registered contact email address would be a good start.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
In the spirit of free information growth and sharing.
.com enconomy, actual hit's(pagecounts, banner ads) b/c of the misuse of TLD's (i.e. mispelling of popular domains) is becoming less of a means of gaining fincially by page views. Aside from the obvious copyright problems with registering TLD's of trademarked names their shouldn't be any other limits of the possibilities of TLD's.
Why would the banning of TLD make that much of difference aside from the ease of use for the web. When you goto whitehouse.com you obviously know that it is not the offical site for the White House. Ease of use is the only logical reason for limiting of use of TLD's. With the downturn of the current
--- My Karma is bigger than your...
------ This sentence no verb
ICANN already owns all the single-digit domains, and the double-digit domains are probably all held by cybersquatters, so I just don't see this as something to be outraged about.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
- Nietzsche
We may live in democracies, but that is only true for a few days every four years.(barely--witness the American Presidential "elections")
The rest of the time capitalism wins the day, and money greases the wheels of the gears that make it possible to hire (some) of us at inflated salaries.
The Internet no longer belongs to the long-haired phone-phreakers of the days of yore. That is why they *privatized* Internic, because the gov't could no longer subsidize the beast.
We know that webpages and email aren't the internet and that it so much more, which is why we get in a snit about shit pulled by the corporations, but explain that to the majority of users. Napster is about as close as most of them will ever come to realizing the potential of the Internet, and they are more concerned about getting free music. Welcome to the Hive.
(grumble) I must have woken up on the wrong side of the bed today..
The fundamental problem above is that 'content' would seem to indicate a web presence. This of course, as others have pointed out, would not work due to the fact that there are a lot of domains that aren't used for web hosting.
I think a better solution would be to require the owner to make some use of it in a given time period -- however defining 'use' is as slipery as a french fry in gravy. There would be nothing stopping squatters from setting up a mail server on the domain just to give it reasonable 'use'.
Maybe instead ICANN (or whoever it is) should just outlaw the sale of domain names -- if you no longer require it, it goes back into the pool. One arguement against this is that unbeknownst to ICANN a party could 'sub-let' the domain name to a third party. But then this could be policed by other interested parties. That is, if I want bob.com and it is registered to a company 'All Your Names are Belong to Us' but is being used by Bob's Hardware, then I launch an official complaint.
Maybe my solution has more holes than the existing .. I'd love you to respond and show me where!
Cheers!
Rick (whose unusual surname is being cyber-squatted for no apparent reason)
What they are proposing is like saying "A child can not be named 'Timothy' because this was the name of Timothy McVeigh".
It's as if saying you can't own your own name.. after all, it is your right, isn't it?
Yes. You are right. It is easier to be ignorant; And I'm sure that if you type "word processor" into the IE address bar you will be taken directly to the Microsoft Word website. Maybe in the future Microsoft will have developed a robotic arm that comes out of your computer, extracts a credit card from your wallet, and just buys Microsoft products for you, no thought needed. You obviously have no clue as to what /. is about, otherwise you wouldn't have used a Microsoft "user-friendly" "feature" as an example of how great the internet will be when Bill Gates makes all of our decisions for us. Slashdot is too nerdy for you. Please use the "Back" feature of your Microsoft browser to return to the pre-installed Microsoft homepage and never return to SlashDot again. Better yet, use the CTRL-ALT-DEL feature instead. Using a computer probably requires too much thought for you.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Since it's impossible for someone to use someone else's TLD (website cracking notwithstanding), then perhaps this logic should be applied to your proposal.
"Anonymous Coward" is for whistleblowers, not unpopular opinions.
Either way, W's campaign had to sacrifice at least some resources on their part to do this. Those that ordinarily might have bought up these names, other than Gore's campaign staffers at least had the opportunity to do so. Under this proposal, no such equalizing system exists. It's preordained that the powerful will not be "tampered" with.
"Anonymous Coward" is for whistleblowers, not unpopular opinions.
I would oppose reserved names for this reason beyond all others. In the sex.com litigation, a federal judge ruled that domain names are not property like a trademark or copyright. Rather they are a service, like a phone number. Anyone can buy a particular 1800 number as long as no one else is using it first. You can have 1-800-gateway and Gateway computers could not touch you. It should be that way with domain names as well. If a multibillion dollar corporation wants to have all the top level domain names for its trademark than it can shell out the 70 bucks per piece that us regular folks have to. And if they don't want to lease the domain names and pay the money then someone else is gonna do it.
What's with the department listing on this story? : ) Is it a little mini-homage to The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy?
In that case there should've been more of the quote up there (because it gets funnier).
It was in a locked filing cabinet in an unlit basement, the stairs had been taken out, and there was a sign on the door saying "Beware of the leopard".
Not an exact quote I know, but all I had to go on at the moment was my HHGttG audio CDs, my book is out on loan.
Bo Bankson
Country codes dont mean an awful lot nowerdays anyway. Many of the small countries have sold the rights to their domains to domain name registartion companies.
What is the poinbt of country coes if sites under them are nothing to do with the country in question?
[3] set policy. "First come, first serve." (that's it. done.)
Alright cool I will be the first. I claim every single domain name that can exist. You can rent these domain names from me at $100 a year.
[4] Convince big name ISPs to point to these root servers. (extremely difficult)
It would be really difficult to convince AOL to change if aol.com takes you to aolsucks.com
I personally feel that the internet is changing to much for the worse. alot of interesting things have made it better, but places like ICANN seem to just rule the web... im in favor of first come first serve. if you can think of a domain that isnt taken, then you should be able to get it, otherwise, somebody got to it first...
-net free forums for your website
a great Slash based site.