ICANN Meeting off to Shaky Start in Uruguay

JoeGee writes: "Reuters is reporting that the quarterly meeting of ICANN got off to a very shaky start in Montevideo, Uruguay on Friday September 8th. Protesters claim that ICANN's domain registration policies are creating a "digital divide". A special telephone party line created for members who could not be present at the meeting went unused. ICANN seems to be internalizing the turmoil that has surrounded the non-profit corporation since its inception in 1998."

Comments

Stupidest?

[mwillems]

It seems to me that you are overreacting. Socialists ^H^H^H^Hliberals? Not sure it's not just ordinary marketing, not politics.

Sure, in the uk a .co.uk domain is not unusual. But that is becuase it's easier and cheaper, not becuase they prefer it that way. The .com domain is preferable for very good marketing reasons.

• The browsers default to .com. Are you aware how many people start IE or netscape and type "sears" or whatever and wait for the browser to do the rest?
  
  
• You are Aceme building and a competitor gets acmebuilding.com - does that make you havepy to have your .co.za domian or whatever? Methinks not.
  
  
• .com is shorter and hence easier to remember. In marketing terms this is very important.
  
  
• Unlike in the US, many companies abroad do not market locally. A typical Dutch company, for instance, sells to 5 or 6 countries. Holland is so small you can literally drive across it in 90 minutes. What good is a .nl domain? Think Germans know what that is? No way. But .com they understand.
  
  

So, before you (maybe from a luxury position of being American?) tell others they do not need .com domains, perhaps allow them to decide this for themselves. I always thought it odd that some unelected company in Virginia doles out domains, 9-5 EST USA time.

Cheers,
Michael

Nope

[Planesdragon]

a "corporation" is a legal person that can bring suits, and works in the business world. It pays taxes, obeys the law, and is a real "thing."

a "non-profit corporation" is any artifical person that exists for some reason other than the profit of its shareholders. The most popular and well-known non-profits are charities, such as United Way, the Boy Scouts of America, and the Salvation Army. Non-charitable non-profits also exist, used often to manage something a business wants done (such as Java.)

I believe a church is something different. :)

I CAN abandon ICANN, So Can You

[asackett]

The Open Root Server Confederation and OpenNIC, among others, provide root servers that ICANN does not control. I can see domain names like Atlantic.Ocean -- can you?

If not, you should!

At-Large Membership is a sham

[securitas]

I've been an At-Large member since ICANN started the project. Although I am on the announcement list I haven't received a single e-mail about meetings, initiatives or what-have-you in months (at a minimum).

I, for one, am tired of Esther Dyson's self-righteous elitist cronies telling the rest of us how the Internet should be.

I was skeptical but had hopes when the At Large initiative started. I've now come to see it as it is: a sham that gives the illusion of openness and the air of democratic legitimacy to those who willingly turn a blind eye to the autocratic, business-as-usual attitude of the ICANN Board. By the way, here's the text of a relevant rejected post I sent in:

Studies: Public Participation in Internet Policy (Your Rights Online, Internet)

The New York Times informs us that two new reports from ICANN and the Center for Democracy and Technology both say that more public participation is required in policy-making. DUH! The ICANN report says only domain name holders should have rights, while the CDT report says the process should be open to all interested parties. We'll see what happens on Nov. 14 when the reports are tabled at the next ICANN meeting.