Slashdot Mirror
US Seeks Veto Powers Over New TLDs
suraj.sun writes "The Obama administration is quietly seeking the power for it and other governments to veto future top-level domain names, a move that raises questions about free expression, national sovereignty, and the role of states in shaping the future of the Internet. At stake is who will have authority over the next wave of suffixes to supplement the venerable .com, .org, and .net. At least 115 proposals are expected this year, including .car, .health, .nyc, .movie, and .web, and the application process could be finalized at a meeting in San Francisco next month."
People want their government to have power of pushing things... which said people want.
/. story, anyway? ;p )
In the submission, linked below TFS, there's a mention of efforts for ".gay" TLD - many groups in the society would just love to block it. And many nations (and why it didn't make it to
One that hath name thou can not otter
http://www.opennicproject.org/
A "fairer" idea: Stop issuing new non-country/U.N. TLDs. .com.us, .edu.us, etc. for anyone with an existing or new .com, .edu, etc. for the next 20 years.
Put everyone on notice that if they register a NEW 2nd-level non-country domain name now (foo.com) it will be revoked in 10 years. Give existing domain owners a little longer - say, 15-20 years - to retire existing domains. Reserve
People won't like it but at least it will end the bickering.
Now, as for new 2nd-level.us domains, the USA can do that without stepping on other countries sovereignty and they can make whatever.cc without stepping on America's.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
THIS is why the US is supposed to have separation of powers (federalism) between the Member States and the Union government, so no one maniac can become too powerful, but over time many of us have forgotten that basic principal
The term "state rights" is unfortunately now invokes the American Civil War.
We have seen this with health care, immigration, and numerous other issues. It is easier to scream racist than to actually deal with the issue or to even debate who should deal with the issue.
The other problem is people live in the moment. Bush got a lot of flack for not sending the troops immediately during Katrina. They felt that he should have bypassed the governor who was moving to slow. All the people whining at the time did not bother to think of the implications of the Executive Branch deciding on its own to invade (sorry - assist with keeping order) a state. While it may have been a good idea at the time, the precedent it would have set would have been terrible (same with the patriot act - useful at the time but something we will never be rid of now.)