Slashdot Mirror
Texas Company's Legal Troubles Hold .iq In Limbo
aducore writes "According to The Inquirer, the (American) company running the Iraqi .iq domain name .iq is under criminal indictment and cannot transfer control. So no Iraqi organization can get a .iq domain name, including the government. Iraq's National Communications and Media Commission and the U.S. administrator in Iraq are trying to get ICANN to free up the domain."
I am not quite sure what state the infrastructure of Iraq is in, but I guess that fresh water, electricity and roads comes higher on the priority list.
.iq!"
"Hey, someone is blocking
"Hey, someone is blocking our watersupply!"
Except for everything we say we want to control.
You say you want a revolution....
Must be something in the water
I don't understand, so what the company has been indicted.
Just move the domain. They don't need to physically move anything, heck they claim that domain names aren't even property.
But Iraq didn't choose to outsource its domain. ICANN made the decision for them. Abhorrent as censorship is, did they have the right to do that? Should a body like ICANN be involved in politics?
Mod parent up!
Sad isn't it - the parent poster felt compelled to write that he's not unpatriotic just because (s)he was airing facts that don't support the government line.
Reminds me of when the story about BT blocking child pr0n sites was up and everyone who was raising concerns about the ramifications of that felt compelled to state they didn't condone child pr0n.
It's a dangerous path we're treading - where to raise a question immediatley pus you under suspicion of guilt...
'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
This is a heavy, conservative right-wing magazine.
Huh, what are you smoking? The Economist might be slanted towards pro-globalization and pro-free trade, but I usually find their op-eds well balanced - if they do take positions, they usually justify it quite well, and they present facts from both sides.
You want heavy, conservative right-wing? Try Time or Newsweek!
Im guessing ICANN might want to keep in line with the US legal system since that is where they are located. Now, Im no great lover of ICANN but simply desciding to take back the domain from a company due to some political descissions seems just as bad as the first descission they took with regards to the domain. To use an old saying, "two bads dont make a good".
Karma: 2.71828182846 (Mostly due to small, fun pills)
ACTUALLY, here in America (I know because I live here), the Economist is regarded as one of the most even-handed magazines out there. You're acting like he just linked an article from the National Review. (I could understand the "whoa there buddy" if that were the case, but it's definitely not.) I even regard the Economist to be more liberal than conservative. The Economist, however, has no political affiliations - it's quite non-partisan. (Maybe that word is too big for you to understand?)
Americans: This country was founded on isolationism and not making out decisions based on what others want us to do, but rather what furthers our own betterment. (Sorry if you don't like it, socialist Europe, but those are the facts.) Vote with your heart and mind, not with somoene elses'.
Please. They endorsed Bill Clinton in '92 and, just earlier this year, "Red" Ken Livingstone for mayor of London. Additionally, the editors have been outspoken in support of gay marriage and contraceptive education in third-world countries, to name a couple of traditionally "liberal" issues. And though they endorsed Bush in 2000, it seems highly improbable that they'll do so again this year, judging from the tone they've taken recently. For instance: one, and, more humorously, two. Finally, do you really think a magazine with a right-wing stick up its ass would produce a cover like this?
The Economist may be highly opinionated, but it's definitely not the "conservative, right-wing" mouthpiece.
I normally like to till the soil and screw the incumbent. Both of these idiots are way too tax and spend for my liking. And Kerry's "gun grabbing" past doesnt make him exactly shine in the civil rights department. The deconstruction of any constitutional right leads to the rest in a handbasket.
c iples.htm , check out the names at the bottom of list and the policies set forth in the documents.
The time is nigh where a real third party in the US needs to start forming. The US Government and the state governments are far, far to big. Not that they are useless, but neither candidate seems interested in culling the excess.
One of the biggest problems with Kerry is well established lying, Hanoi Jane ties and just as Bush is he is a 322 Skull and Bonesman from Yale which makes these races for President seem far more like an appointment than a real best man win contest.
Just for fun, check out this place, http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprin
Prove us wrong.
But Iraq didn't choose to outsource its domain. ICANN made the decision for them. Abhorrent as censorship is, did they have the right to do that? Should a body like ICANN be involved in politics?
.iq TLD, they could simply wipe out all existing entries and decide to start fresh.
A TLD is virtual property and is owned by the creator. So whoever thought up the TLDs gets to control them. The interesting thing that could happen is if Iraq were handed control of the
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
This has got to be one the least of the problems the new Iraqi government is facing right now.
.org domain somewhere instead of .iq
Let's see: the new gov has a legitimity problem, a lot of people want to blow them up, neighbours are considering making things even harder, they have to justify a continued US presence to a skeptical population, they have to organize free elections in a country racked by terrorism, and hmm, oh yes, their web site is on a
Jeez, which problem should they tackle first?
It puts me in mind of a friend of mine who, when talking about Fahrenheit 9/11, declared that he was "glad someone has finally made good use of the out-of-control media" to show the world that Bush blah blah blah.
No magazine would, for instance, call for the resignation of the Secretary of Defense, and then support the call with grumbling and appeals to emotion.
The Economist is not right-wing. It is not balanced. It is left-wing, because if it were to be any other way, it would not sell internationally.
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
That's my point. It shouldn't be a salable item - an asset - and it's management shouldn't have been irrevocably given to a private company like InfoCom.
.tv scenario was a friggin bad joke.
It's like delegating management of the +964 country code to a business that gets into legal trouble, then they decide they want to sell the area code back to the country it represents. They're effectively blocking access to that country through normal means. It ridiculous. ICANN should be able to redelegate the management of the TLD to someone capable of doing the job - and it should NOT be an asset to be profited from. Yes, I think the
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
Well now hold on a second... dangerous path, or common sense ?
Hicksville, population:2000.
A woman gets raped.
The police, after a long investigation, are at a loss.
They decide to run a wide-scale voluntary DNA test (can't force them anyway, at least not here).
700 of the men fit in the age group that the woman could at least identify the rapist into.
699 cooperate and have a DNA sample taken.
1 does not cooperate.
No matter what excuse this 1 person comes up with (civil liberties, slippery slope, dangerous path, yadda yadda), please tell me how the police should just say "Okiedoke, your fair right" and not have a closer look and see if maybe there's a different/another reason for him not to cooperate ?
And that is the police, who at least have to live by some form of rules, however arbitrary they may seem sometimes.
In the case of people saying "We shouldn't block websites that are arbitrarily judged to be child pornography websites", you better understand that a vast majority of the population is going to at least raise an eyebrow. It is in the best interest of those people to state that they explicitly don't condone child pornography, and are only trying to point out that there will be unjust collateral damage. Though that will only offer a partial redemption.
And it doesn't help that people like Hugh Russ Campbell have used these same arguments before, and then get convicted (on a guilty plead) of not only owning and distributing child pornography, but creating it as well.
With such circumstances - well, I'm sorry, but I too would be suspicious of such people.
The difference between suspecting a person and doing something about it is the 'vigilante' aspect. If one is worried about vigilantes, deal with them - but you can't blame a person for having a pretty reasonable opinion for this day and age.
Just my 2 cents.
Yeah, the economist is left-wing, alright. That is why they supported the war in Iraq to begin with, are strong proponents of globalization, and free-trade. All strong left-wing policies. But then again they have those crazy right-wing views like saying that monopolies like Microsoft need to be delt with more harshly than they currently are.
</sarcasm>
The economist is neither left-wing nor right-wing, nor are they unbias. I wouldn't really call them libertarian either (look at their recent write up on the libertarian candidate to see that he is not treated as one of their flock). They have a unique bias that you don't find in other papers. If I had to charaterize it, I would say that they care first and foremost for the economy as a whole as well as world stability. This is contrasted with traditional conservatives who put the "rights" of individual businesses first and foremost. Sometimes these interests coincide and sometimes they don't. They are pragmatic, acknowledging that market forces, while overwelmingly positive, sometimes have negative effects on society. However, unlike liberals, their proposed remedies always involve fixing the root supply-and-demand cause of the problem, rather than trying to enforce expensive brute force legislation that must constantly fight against the market forces. Furthermore, I must agree with your parent, that when they do write opinion pieces they do a much better job of backing up thier point of view than most. Even though I don't always agree with them, they always make me think.
Lastly, they do attempt (and in my opinion usually succeed) in presenting unbiased reports of the other points of view. They do this because they have a genuine interest in understanding the dynamics of the political and economic systems that we are engulfed in. They are above all pragmatic and realise that you cannot develop an educated opinion or course of action if you ignore the elements that make up the situation.
Screw that. The entire state needs a good Baghdading.