Slashdot Mirror
ICANN At-Large Study
perp writes: "ICANN has published the draft of its At-Large recommendations. It's long, but it looks like they're trying to raise the bar for at-large membership by requiring at-large members to a) pay a fee and b) be a registered domain holder. Their comments about all the non-committed at-large members who "enrolled only because it was easy" gave me a laugh; it took three days of trying for me to register." The draft also proposes slashing At-Large board members from 9 to 6. But there are some good points in there about organizational issues.
everyone wants more money.
gr....... greed these days
Here is the issue: I wanted to visit classicgaming.org, spelled it wrong, and ended up with so many ads that I had to kill my browser. What does a million banner ads have to do with classic gaming?
Everyone has stories like this, and the issue here is deception. There has been no reprimand for deceiving people with domain names. If I create a website like www.guinnessucks.com, Guiness sues me, but there is no consumer watch organization that looks out for situations that clearly interfere with usage of the internet.
This consumer watch organization should be the ICANN. No more of this "do what you want with it" philosophy. If I create a website called clasicgaming.com, it better have something to do with the words in it's title, or lose my domain name. Registering a domain name should be like registering a Trade mark or a radio station, but just more streamlined.
In the name of civil liberty and through obscure definition of Free Speech, people are letting serious violation of a user's rights pass on the Internet. We are even defending this in fear that they'll come after us. It's time to realize that communities need policing, and usually the cops don't bust your door down if you're not breaking the law. It is time for regulation.
Isn't the assignment/registration of domain names ICANN's sole responsibility? If ICANN strays from this responsibility to exert influence on other areas, then ICANN is abusing its power and must be opposed.
******
"What makes you think I care about your opinions?"
...I tried numerous times, repeatedly, and couldn't in over a week of random attempts. ICANN's "legitimacy" to me is ALWAYS in question when they pull stupid stunts like this. If anything, it should be administered as the United States political system is-- each netizen can vote for a person to represent their part of the world, and each part of the world is given up to X many reps to represent them. (This would more closely model the U.S. Senate I suppose.) These same netizens would also elect a Director or President which would have veto power and be able to try to define the tasks ICANN tackles.
As it is right now, ICANN isn't much more than a government (DoC) mandated farce.
(Forgive me if this seems flame-like, but I'm sincerely unhappy with ICANN (on so many levels this post probably only hit the top one or two things I dislike about them).)
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
ICANN represents an effort at global self-regulation that, if successful, has great merit in a number of different ways and if it fails, it has the potential to fuck up our lives in a number of different ways. I don't think that making it less accountable is likely to make it more successful.
ICANN can have their pretty suit club and shake hands over wine all they want. I don't mind being hosted on a third-level hierarchy, like things were meant to be.
First they allow Network Solutions to screw around with policy and now they're trying to make it more difficult for indeviduals to have a voice. This is truly outragous. Unfortunately, there aren't that many alternatives as far as influencing the process. At this point, what level of governmental oversight is there for ICANN? (I should know this but I'm getting old - memory isn't what it used to be... :)
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
The reccomendation that the at-large membership be comprised of domain-name holders rather than the broader internet user population is setting up a conflict of interest.
Domain names are primarily valuable currently because they are a scarce resource. By creating an at-large membership comprised entirely of domain name holders, they are setting up an entrenched interest that will oppose the proliferation of gTLDs, as Karl Auerbach has been pushing for.
Clearly, they hope that this action will not lead to his re-election, but will place someone more 'reasonable' in his place.
This is just another tactic aimed at maintaining an artificial scarcity of domain names, and sharpening ICANN as a tool to manufacture and maintain this scarcity. ICANN is looking more like the diamond cartel every day.
For the record, I currently own 35 domain names.
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
Slim. Soon to be none.
Anyone know what the evidence they mention is? Or is this actually just pure speculation instead an actual reference to evidence?
I'm not aware of ICANN doing anything to research whether that speculation is true or not. All I really know is that they haven't asked me why I signed up.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The so-called Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a fraud foisted upon the world by thieves trying to steal from humanity the greatest communications mechanism in human history: the Internet. The U.S. Department of Commerce has been an accomplice in the give-away of the publicly developed Internet to provate, corporate interests. The chicanery behind ICANN, which is similar to the corruption of the American Supreme Court, whose chief hoodlums Rehnquist and Scalia partisanly awarded a Presidential election in A.D. 2000 to the losing side, points to an organization of inept bunglers like "the gang that couldn't shoot straight" or erstwhile movie fame. Once democracy in America is restored, the ICANN privateers may find themselves subject to prosecution and federal imprisonment under the laws of the American democracy -- along with military officers prosecuted and imprisoned for "following orders" issued by the cabal that includes the illegitimate Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld appointed by the illegitmate American President.
Vanity domain names do not fall into either category you've laid out. For example, I own "bitey.net". Now, honestly, with what you're proposing, my website ought to be about biting things, otherwise it's deceptive and I have no right to my domain.
Who are you to tell me I can't own bitey.net?
And who are you to tell me I must run a website on every domain I purchase? Believe it or not, there are plenty of domains that exist but do not have websites! Is there something inherently wrong with this? I think not. I hope nobody thinks so.
- A.P.
"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?"
Should amazon.com be killed because it's not about really tall women?
Should slashdot.org be killed because it's about neither slashes nor dots?
I hope what you typed there was a joke, but i fear it wasn't.. so your upset because you typed classicgaming.org wrong and got a gazillion ads... learn how to spell man... the whole point of a global network set up the way it has been so far is a place where any one can say and do(hopefully) anything.. so if your taken advantage of because you got pudgy fingers.. tough get over it.. or go and play with your doll house some more.
I Can Assimilate (yet) ANother Nickle.
-S
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
At first I thought this was just a power grab by the corporate interests which already dominate ICANN. But then I came across this in the document (note I didn't read the whole thing, just skimmed).
"We propose the At-Large user "community" include institutions, but only individuals may vote. Institutions already play a greater role in the existing Supporting Organizations, so this seems an appropriate balance. We encourage your input on this issue. "
Further down they discuss the issue of multiple domain names and the possibilities of fraud. Since it is relatively inexpensive and easy to register a domain name these days, I don't think that the individual net user is necessarily locked out of the process.
It can't be any worse than the system they used in the last election. I never did receive the snail-mail that was supposed to give me my password. I got many e-mails telling me it was coming, but apparently they sent it via the Pony Express.
--
I'm not an actor, but I play one on tv.
It is a valid concern that members be Real People and not just throwaway email accounts one someone's machine, so physical snail mailings should remain a part of the process.
Physical snail mails, especially to many thousands of people all over the world, cost real money.
Requiring that members have a registered domain name is a sneaky way of keeping ICANN from being the entity that pays that money -- instead the registrar handles it, and the expense actually gets covered when domain holders pay for their domains. It seems like a nice idea at first, but as others have pointed out, it does create a conflict of interest.
IMHO, the best thing to do is to charge fees to cover the mailing and administration expense. This really does solve the problem, and it is superior solution to requiring domain registration.
The question is whether it'll be ten bucks or a thousand. When I see the dollar amount, I'll know if ICANN is still trying to maintain an appearance of legitimacy.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
What exactly is a "fraudulent regustration"? Do they mean the registration of a non-person? Fine. Check to see if the people who signed up exist. Is that what they're alleging? It seems to me that if someone is interested enough in ICANN to bother registering, they are interested enough to have a say.
Nope, no sig
...only land-owners will be allowed to vote.
My logic is: Did you ever play Quake III Arena? Maybe you wanted to? If the answer is yes to either, now is a great time to legally own a legit version of Q3Arena at the cheapest price you'll ever find... and as a bonus, you'll be helping out a linux game developer with a good record for quality games. You know that once you have a legal pak0 and CD Key you can run Q3 on any of: linux, win32, macOS 8-9, MacOS X, and um... yeah. See ebgames.com at the low price of $10, why not also get Decent 3? $4 shipping, in stock now, you'll have it in 2 days.
If you're /really/ modivated to help loki, go to their loki store and give them a better profit margin.
Okay that was a bit off topic; maybe if I tossed in a "the devil is in the [code] defects" I'd get a sympathetic funny rating from those who like bad puns. You know who you are...
-Daniel
"Scooby Doo is essentially about casting the light of reason
on corruption cloaked in mysticism" - Scrymarch
DebianLinux.Net
The 3 board seats they are removing, won't be the corporate members, will they? Ha ha.
Fuck ICANN. The AlterDNS Project beta is going well, and we'll have 3 broadband root servers before we go live. You'll run bind like you should be doing anyway, and we won't take over the entire "." root zone, like orsc or alternic does. As a matter of fact, you'll just as easily be able to add them, should you suddenly be struck dumb and tasteless. And our rules reflect our belief that DNS is a community resource, not a hostage that corporations hold over us.
Those rules are...
#1 No corporate registrations. Your trademarks are not recognized here.
#2 No reselling of domain names.
#3 No cybersquatting. All domains must be used within 2 weeks of registration
#4 No bulk registrations.
On top of that, we've managed to choose aTLDs that are somewhat meaningful, tasteful even. They're free, in every meaning of the word. So really, what's stopping you?
I tried signing up when they first ran the @Large thing. It was a huge hassle and in the end they never sent me the confirmation code so I could complete the process. I tried to use the form on their website to get the confirmation code and it never worked. I gave up after trying a half dozen times and wasting a few hours of my life.
My opinion of them is that they are an incompetent bunch of fools, and are probably dangerous to the freedom of the internet.
So, registering i_am_in_icann_34567.net would allow me to join?
Slashdot.org should be killed because it ceased to be a hobby site ages ago. It should be Slashdot.com now.
ICANN already gets several million dollars a year in funding, and now it wants more. This particular tax would be attached to domain registration, raising the price of that even higher. And what do I get for this extra money? Less representation.
Personally, I'd like to see ICANN actually do something before I give them even more money. The Open Root Server Confederation looks better every day.
Unless your browser displays a progress meter comprised of dots while loading a page. If so, /. will give you dozens of dots on every page request!
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
The next step, of course, is a literacy test.
History being cyclical isn't a problem until it rolls backwards.
Seriously, why can all of us slashdot users just found a new root domain server. Everyone add it to resolv.conf (or what ever your IP setting on Win or Mac). I realize some countries were trying to do this a while back but I never found out what the result was.
We are not breaking the old DNS. We agree completely with ICANN on the importance of the stability of the inclusive namespace. We absolutely will not touch a TLD or domain that is outside of our purview.
Our root.cache file is here (or here). See for yourself. There are no .us domains in it whatsoever.
The OpenNIC claims only 5 TLDs. We have over 500 registered members - growing fast - and many more users.
Finally, pointing resolve.conf at ANYONE gives that party control of what you see. I think the OpenNIC is more worthy of user trust than any other root, including ICANN/VGA. This is because the entire organization is governed by the vote of its members, much like the Debian people. So nobody's cutting deals behind the scenes.
Get it straight, Cleatus. You're embarassing yourself.
I believe ICANN are corrupt - they know the solution to trademark and domain name problems.
.com domain."
The First Amendment is totally ignored and big business abuse their trademarks - to give themselves a dominant position over others with same or similar name.
Quote from NY Times:
Sun Makes Claims on Domain Names
"But among the names on the list are generic terms like "enterprise" and "ultra" -- and for that matter, "sun" -- that could be claimed by other businesses. Indeed, a main reason for introducing new extensions, referred to as top-level domains, is to increase the pool of names available to individuals and businesses and to relieve crowding in the
Please visit WIPO.org.uk for details.
Think of this as being comprable to voting for your President/Prime Minister/Head of Government; if I wat to have a voice in who the head of the UK government is, I have to be a British citizen (or for some odd reason, a Commonwealth citizen resident in the UK). Think of how screwed up global political systems would be if anyone could vote for any head of government. I interact with the UK (through the world economy and by breathing the same air as they do) in much the same way I interact with the internet - so why is it that anyone (including those who arn't "citizens of the internet" - not owning a domain) can elect people to its highest office? I can't vote for US President, so why should those not invloved be able to vot for mine.
The long and the short of it is that most people who really care and are informed enough to make a competent descision do already own domains - thus they have a vested interest in making sure the system dosen't go to hell. Much like citizens of a given county have a vested interest in the political stability and competency of their leadership.
This isn't a flame, and for the record I own a domain.
Cue The Sun...
I think so in some cases. It's almost a type of cybersquatting. When there are really obvious names like "america.com" that have had nothing on them, web-wise, for a number of years I'm temped to say the owner should have web rights stripped of them and given to someone else.
I also wonder what people think of the tendency to register lots of unrelated domain names to pull people into a generic commercial site, sich as how america.org and Top50.com both send you the same site.
Personally, both these sites (and usa.com {looksmart and infospace content channelled through a different name/site} ) are a pet peeve of mine. I'd like to see or put something up about my own country using the name of the country as a domain that isn't a clone of 500 other portals. At least USA.org is part of the open directory project.
For a while people really were squatting on these names and auctioning them off. (and yes, there is active auctioning on america.info and usa.info that I'm hoping will either go to someone creative and/or be screwed by the start-up phase away from the registrars that are trying to pump the price and to (randomly selected) registrars with smaller-time non-rich folk using them.)
perhaps I'm an optimist
And the award for lamest ASCII art of the day goes to ... YOU!
I think your taking his post a little too far. There is a big difference between having either a mispelled current domain to trick users into visiting than to have a site (that is named...slashdot for example) on the domain that doesn't seem to match. Amazon.com is a company name, hence relating the domain to the site..but that is really irrelevant.
.com, .org, .net, etc....and those people don't deserve to be forced to see something offesnive.
The fact of the matter is someone needs to be watching out for the web users. I certainly wouldn't have enjoyed being in my school district's shoes when a computer teacher told a class to go to the whitehouse site, and about two thirds of the class went to www.whitehouse.com. It musta been really fun trying to explain to those kids parents when they were all pissed that their children saw some pornography.
People make typo's, make mistakes in choosing the proper
-------------
Andy Tomaka
The decreasing of board members from 9 to 6 members should only be allowed if there is a big election of all at large members who can elect the 6 board members. Otherwise the whole democratic process behind the ICANN system is just a fake! I am realy suspicious about the pseudo democratic elections at at-large. Maybe an alternativ root dns server might help, but I am have not too much convinience in that ( i would realy miss the sience servers (universities etc.) but the rest goes up in my ass!). I wonder what would happen if there is a large (lets say a majority of internet users/providers) which make their own regulations organization. I wonder if these laws would been accepted by countries. I think it wouldn't because the big companies lobbys put too much money in the politicans asses! I think it is time to make some real grass root politics in the context of the internet. At least it was our way to freely communicate.
Sorry for my bad english
- Yasa ((Y)et (A)nother (S)tupid (A)lias)
This is the most boring thing I've ever read. Anyone who sits here and quibbles over some bureaucratic bullshit from a bunch of fart collecting government morons needs to get laid, fast, even if you have to pay for it, which you probably do.
ICANN. Jesus. More like ICANTGETITUP
I don't know what the meaning of "scarce resource" is. Two months ago, I decided I wanted a domain just-for-me, and I got xmau.com . A four-letter name in the most crowded TLD, the first choice I searched for. This for scarceness.
We may argue whether there is a need for indefinite number of Top Level Domains: my personal opinion is that either there is some body who "owns" TLDs and checks whether the requirer har genuine interest in the field named by the TLD, or we end up having .microsoft , .ibm , .whatever instead of microsoft.com, ibm.com, whatever.com. What an enlargement of the namespace!
I have serious doubts about the utility of ICANN-At-Large, but I do not believe either that liberalization of TLD is the Graal.
ciao,You're recommending that an arbitrary group of people be allowed to censor the web at will. Think about this for a minute and see if you really mean that?
Your domain, for instance, is called whoisandy.com, which does not appear to be a registered TM or SM. Let's say Nickelodean comes up with a new kids show called "Who Is Andy?", which is about the life of a fictional character, Andy. Should you lose your domain, since you don't hold the trademark? You're obviously causing public confusion for purely personal gain.
For a less contrived example, let's think 'pokey.com'. You know the one where the little kid was nicknamed pokey, but there's also a much more famous, Claymation figure named Pokey? And the "Big Bad Corporation" took it away? What you're saying is that the child had no right to own that name.
Sure it's inconvenient to hit spelling error related websites, but the consequences of eliminating the problem, especially when you keep in mind that the web is global, is far too dire to even consider.
If you want to keep the kids from hitting whitehouse.com, buy a proxy that can filter out such requests. They're mighty common these days and very reasonably priced. Don't do it by restricting my rights.
Yeah, I really don't know how to say what I want to. I do think some sort of ruling on domain names needs to be implemented to keep things working without huge problems but how that can be accomplished is beyond me.
-------------
Andy Tomaka