Iraq TLD In Legal Limbo

tcd004 writes "FP Magazine is reporting that despite the fact that Iraq has been a sovereign nation for some 15 months its top-level Internet domain, .iq, has been in a legal limbo. Until now, ICANN has refused to hand over control of the TLD due to the nation's instability." From the article: "But one Baghdad political insider says that the imbroglio is likely to end 'imminently'--possibly by the time this magazine hits newsstands--with ICANN handing over .iq to the new government. It's unclear why ICANN may reverse its earlier decision, whether it be from mounting political pressure or a different position on the legitimacy of the new Iraqi regime. The organization refused repeated requests for comment. But officials affiliated with the Iraqi government indicate they expect the domain's return soon."

Comments

Article wrong?

[thc69]

According to http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-28jul05.htm :

Resolved (05.70) that the proposed redelegation of the .IQ ccTLD to the National Communications and Media Commission (NCMC) of Iraq is approved.

What is a Sovereign nation?

[iambarry]

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_nation

Seems like Iraq is now, and has been for some time, a De jure sovereign nation.

However its not quite a de facto sovereign nation.

Note: I'm not commenting on the legitimacy of the merging of the three provinces of Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra to form modern Iraq by the British in 1918. That is a thread of its own, and not a subject I'm too familiar with.

--Barry

Re:WTF?

[operagost]

Um, where have you been? The USA invaded in 2003. It is now 2005, and the Iraqi Provisional Government has been in authority for over a year. A national assembly was elected by the Iraqi people in January to draft a new constitution, which is close to being voted on.

Extra! Extra! Read all about it! [1]

[Red Flayer]

[1] Well, all about speculation about something that will have already occured by the time you read it.

From the summary: "But one Baghdad political insider says that the imbroglio is likely to end 'imminently'--possibly by the time this magazine hits newsstands--with ICANN handing over .iq to the new government."

I have to commend the article writer, the submitter, and the editors for giving us 'news' that is obviously (obviously as in noted in the article summary) outdated. When an article tells you itself that it is outdated, that's a really, really big hint that some more research is in order before the article gets submitted and/or posted.

Of course, that's what the readers are for -- to do the research themselves and post comments with updated information.

This website has the text of a CNN article from last June explaining why .iq has not been made available to Iraq, and why reassignment has been problematic: http://forums.hostmysite.com/about228.html

Here's some news from 8/5 (over a month ago!) about the .iq reassignment: http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/new s/editorial/12314495.htm

And here it is again: http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml ?articleID=167600327

A couple seconds with Google is all it took.

Please, submitters, you should be checking your submissions for accuracy and 'datedness'.

ICANN's FAQ explains away any Star Chamber ideas

[ianscot]

ICANN does have the chartered role of deciding which registrar in a given country gets to dole out the domains. In this case apparently back in 1997 they made a previous "delegation" for Iraq -- I don't see which element of Saddam's government had that authority. Now they're changing the registrar to the National Communications and Media Commission (NCMC) of Iraq.

It seems a little less Star Chamberish, given that we can review their minutes and look at the FAQ that explains their role.

(Don't blame them for SPAM or Web gambling, folks. They're just the cabal of international bankers and Star Chamber judges who decide who gets to map the IP addresses to the domains.)

Re:Sovereign nation?

[Rei]

So Japan isn't sovereign either, then?

Japan is occupied(4) by the US? Funny - I thought that the current US presence in Japan was agreed upon by a mutually negotiated treaty with the elected Japanese government in the 1960s, well after occupation, and played no part in the day to day operation of, and local policing of, the country.

Silly me.

Re:51st State

[beady]

Something I can speak in relative experience on for once!
Jersey is one of the Channel Islands, which are a group of islands in the English Channel, more or less.
Jersey is the largest island of the group, followed by Guernsey (where I am from), and then Alderney (where I was born), and then some other smaller islands, such as Sark and Herm.
I'm sure wikipedia has plenty of information if you actually want to look. It must be said, it is refreshing to see a New Jersey resident even consider the existence of the "old" Jersey.

Re:Article right

[RoboRay]

It was resolved six weeks before this article was posted on /.!

Re:Ok, that's it.

[NaDrew]

Zonk, my boy, you've done it. First the dupes, then the misleading headlines, and now this. This is the last drop. I can't stand your editorship anymore. Zonk, I hereby award you the dubious honor of being the first editor whose stories are banned from my /. homepage.

While I tend to agree, you should note that the "sovereign nation" reference is a quote from TFA.

Re:Sovereign nation?

[anaesthetica]

De jure (in Classical Latin de iure) is an expression that means "based on law", as contrasted with de facto, which means "in fact".

The Latin de jure should not be confused with the French du jour which translates to "of the day", as, for example, in soupe du jour.

I did mean "de jure," not "du jour". Wikipedia is your friend.