VeriSign Withdraws Domain-Suspension Proposal

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

VeriSign Withdraws Domain-Suspension Proposal

Posted by timothy on Thursday October 13, 2011 @09:11AM from the it-was-just-a-trial-balloon dept.

GeorgeK writes "To update Wednesday's Slashdot article, VeriSign, the .com/net domain name registry, has withdrawn their controversial proposal which would have allowed them to suspend domains without a court order and without due process. VeriSign did not give a reason for the withdrawal. Slashdot 1, VeriSign 0."

48 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

First?? by Cutting_Crew · 2011-10-13 09:12 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Reason? We just wanted to see how much we could get away with because we are slimy worms.
1. Re:First?? by ackthpt · 2011-10-13 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  Reason? We just wanted to see how much we could get away with because we are slimy worms.
  Or perhaps they ran it up the flagpole to see how various parties would react.
  Could well be an attorney or Attorney General or Powerful Industry Lobby Group or very well placed janitor convinced they they would be wise to bin the idea.
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
2. Re:First?? by plover · 2011-10-13 10:03 · Score: 1
  
  Reason? We just wanted to see how much we could get away with because we are slimy worms.
  Could well be an attorney or Attorney General or Powerful Industry Lobby Group or very well placed janitor convinced they they would be wise to bin the idea.
  Hardly. The Attorneys General and Powerful Industry Lobbies would love a ruling that lets them heroically take down the ne'er-do-wells of the Internet without all those messy judges and their "due process" nonsense screwing things up. After all, we all know cyberterrorists don't have rights, and they'd promise never to misuse the process. They even pinky-swore.
  Seriously, I don't know that they were intentionally being slimy worms, or if they were just trying to do something to "help fight teh ebil wikileakers" without thinking through all the negative ramifications that would grant any old TomDickAndHarrystan the "right" to take down sites like freeTibet.org. Or maybe they didn't care because they are slimy worms. It's hard to know for sure as I'm not a Versign employee, and last time I checked I wasn't a slimy worm, either.
  
  --
  John
3. Re:First?? by sjames · 2011-10-13 10:45 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt they're INTENTIONALLY being slimy worms, they just ARE slimy worms so that's what they'll be.
4. Re:First?? by Jawnn · 2011-10-14 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  While it's tempting to attribute human motivations (being a slimy worm) to corporations, that would be a mistake. There motivation was, or should have been, one of profit and nothing else. Yes, many considerations must be factored into a business decision like this, and clearly at least one such consideration (how much ill-will and lost business it would generate) was left out or poorly calculated. In the end though, "the right thing" is not something that any corporation gives a shit about if it costs money. That's the way corporations are supposed to act - completely and utterly without morals. Now, think about that the next time you vote for someone who will appoint Supreme Court justices who will grant citizenship, and all the rights thereof, to corporations.
Slashdot 1 by Pieroxy · 2011-10-13 09:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

How arrogant! Do you really think Slashdot had anything to do with the withdrawal ?

--
Write boring code, not shiny code!
1. Re:Slashdot 1 by hedwards · 2011-10-13 09:18 · Score: 1
  
  The typically provide links to discussions here.
2. Re:Slashdot 1 by ackthpt · 2011-10-13 09:18 · Score: 1
  
  How arrogant! Do you really think Slashdot had anything to do with the withdrawal ?
  Quiet, you. Or they won't show you your data that they hold with their intellectual property trade secrets!
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
3. Re:Slashdot 1 by RobinEggs · 2011-10-13 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah! It was totally that petition I posted to my Facebook Wall that got them to back down.
  
  The self-importance of some people....
4. Re:Slashdot 1 by Night64 · 2011-10-13 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  How arrogant! Do you really think Slashdot had anything to do with the withdrawal ?
  Well, if you are a employee of Verisign, could you tell us why then ? If you're not, tell us anyway. We like to read fiction. :)
  
  --
  Grey's Law: Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
5. Re:Slashdot 1 by TheRaven64 · 2011-10-13 09:42 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe, at least be helping to publicise an unpopular proposal. The more amusing bit was 'VeriSign: 0'. Given the amount of crap they've pulled and got away with over the last few years, It's more like 'Slashdot: 1, VeriSign: 23'.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
6. Re:Slashdot 1 by jd · 2011-10-13 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  Hard to say. Slashdot has a readership in excess of 100,000 (which puts it on-par with that of most major newspapers) and is read primarily by people in IT (whereas most major newspapers have a diverse readership). Whilst it is not possible to know in any given case how big of a role Slashdot has played, mainstream newspapers like The Guardian (who broke the Murdoch scandal and were a major player in the WikiLeaks saga) have unquestionably had influence on major events.
  It is therefore reasonable to say that Slashdot COULD have an equally large impact from time to time. Not that it has, is or will do in any given case, just could in some case. It has the readership, it has the prominence and it has a level of focus that mainstream media can't.
  I, therefore, say that it is a far worse arrogance to assume Slashdot could not have played a role.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
7. Re:Slashdot 1 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 09:56 · Score: -1
  
  You're a deluded nigger.
8. Re:Slashdot 1 by TechLA · 2011-10-13 10:01 · Score: 1
  
  ...and is read primarily by people in IT (whereas most major newspapers have a diverse readership)...
  ... it has a level of focus that mainstream media can't.
  That's not a good thing, it's a bad thing. Mainstream publicity is what matters. People don't care about what some unknown niche or specific target group says, they care about what the most popular and mainstream opinion is.
9. Re:Slashdot 1 by Adrian+Lopez · 2011-10-13 12:39 · Score: 1
  
  How arrogant! Do you really think Slashdot had anything to do with the withdrawal ?
  While public opposition likely played a significant role in this, I am, if anything, saddened by how little attention this received even on Slashdot. There was a time when such a proposal would have met with significant resistance, as opponents of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 might remember. Those days are apparently long gone, with most people either unaware of or unmoved by attempts to regulate the Internet.
  
  --
  "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
10. Re:Slashdot 1 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 13:31 · Score: 0
  
  Couldn't have put it more eloquently myself.
11. Re:Slashdot 1 by HeadlessNotAHorseman · 2011-10-13 17:10 · Score: 1
  
  Slashdot has a readership in excess of 100,000 (which puts it on-par with that of most major newspapers)
  
  I'm not sure what your definition of a major newspaper is, but here in Melbourne (with a population of < 4 million) the two biggest newspapers have a mon-fri readership of 1,338,000 and 685,000 respectively.
  
  --
  I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
12. Re:Slashdot 1 by jd · 2011-10-14 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  I'd consider The Guardian to be a major newspaper, but it's paper readership is only 80,000. I don't recall the exact figures, but I remember seeing that US national newspaper figures were in the same ballpark. As for your examples, you've got to remember that Australia produced Rolf Harris, Clive James and Steve Irwin. Any nation that can do that is bound to be a little bit... different.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
13. Re:Slashdot 1 by HeadlessNotAHorseman · 2011-10-14 12:00 · Score: 1
  
  Wikipedia disagrees with you :)
  
  --
  I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
Slashdot 10000! by RobinEggs · 2011-10-13 09:18 · Score: 5, Funny

When I saw this story I thought I was entering a lovely dream in which whining on message boards got results and counted as political participation.

Then you woke me up. Jerk.
1. Re:Slashdot 10000! by ObsessiveMathsFreak · 2011-10-13 16:13 · Score: 1
  
  There are hundreds of people camped out in Wall St right now who aren't achieving anything. What makes you think posting on a message board gets any worse results than regular political participation?
  
  --
  May the Maths Be with you!
That's the way it works... by wsxyz · 2011-10-13 09:19 · Score: 4, Insightful

Make outrageous proposal... when everyone howls, withdraw proposal.
Make outrageous proposal again... some people howl, others think "meh", withdraw proposal.
Make outrageous proposal again... a few people howl, a few people think "sounds reasonable", most think "meh", withdraw proposal.
Make outrageous proposal again... a few people think "sounds reasonable", most think "meh", implement proposal.
1. Re:That's the way it works... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 09:24 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  That's your plan for picking up chicks?
2. Re:That's the way it works... by ackthpt · 2011-10-13 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  Make outrageous proposal... when everyone howls, withdraw proposal.
  Make outrageous proposal again... some people howl, others think "meh", withdraw proposal.
  Make outrageous proposal again... a few people howl, a few people think "sounds reasonable", most think "meh", withdraw proposal.
  Make outrageous proposal again... a few people think "sounds reasonable", most think "meh", implement proposal.
  Or they find some way to sugar-coat it, bury it in the fine print of some other proposal or wait for just the right political climate ...
  Invasion! Zygorthian Death Shuttles landing in Grover's Mill! Death Rays fired at town water tower and a few fence posts! President declares emergency! VeriSign, in major patriotic thrust declares they must have the ability to suspend domains without a court order and without due process to save they day!
  It's all in the timing.
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
3. Re:That's the way it works... by majesticmerc · 2011-10-13 09:47 · Score: 1
  
  If you drop a frog in a pot of boiling water, it will of course frantically try to clamber out. But if you place it gently in a pot of tepid water and turn the heat on low, it will float there quite placidly. As the water gradually heats up, the frog will sink into a tranquil stupor, exactly like one of us in a hot bath, and before long, with a smile on its face, it will unresistingly allow itself to be boiled to death.
4. Re:That's the way it works... by wsxyz · 2011-10-13 09:47 · Score: 2
  
  And it works too. Once they're down to "meh" you know they're in the bag.
5. Re:That's the way it works... by SydShamino · 2011-10-13 10:05 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.asp
  
  --
  It doesn't hurt to be nice.
6. Re:That's the way it works... by majesticmerc · 2011-10-13 10:20 · Score: 1
  
  It's not true for frogs, but it certainly is for humans. No other species falls for the same trick so many times!
7. Re:That's the way it works... by mrsurb · 2011-10-14 01:19 · Score: 1
  
  It's called shifting the Overton Window
8. Re:That's the way it works... by SydShamino · 2011-10-18 12:27 · Score: 1
  
  If you replace boiling water with radiated heat, I agree. People won't hold their hand over a radiator until it burns, but they'll "sunbathe" for the same effect, just more slowly. Silly.
  
  --
  It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Do you seriously believe this? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 09:20 · Score: 0

Yeah they put it out in the public but don't you think they would do it behind closed doors or with secret courts that issue warrants for terrorism and recovery from "stolen" iPhones on the back of bar toilets?
Doesn't matter. by ravidew · 2011-10-13 09:25 · Score: 1

Those holding the pen write history.
1. Re:Doesn't matter. by plover · 2011-10-13 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  Those holding the pen write history.
  Not quite. The last person to edit Wikipedia wrote history.
  Think about that difference, Winston Smith.
  
  --
  John
2. Re:Doesn't matter. by ravidew · 2011-10-13 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  Touché.
Credit where credit is due by Dachannien · 2011-10-13 09:26 · Score: 2, Funny

I don't think Slashdot can claim any credit for Verisign's change of heart. I mean, after all, I didn't even post a comment on that article.
1. Re:Credit where credit is due by SydShamino · 2011-10-13 10:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It was my +insightful moderation on a particularly good point that did the trick. Verisign, for your next attempt please note that I accept Paypal and Google Checkout.
  
  --
  It doesn't hurt to be nice.
2. Re:Credit where credit is due by budgenator · 2011-10-13 10:33 · Score: 1
  
  They didn't have a change of heart, just publicly admitted procedure.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
What stops them from actually doing it? by schwit1 · 2011-10-13 09:53 · Score: 2

They can say they aren't going to do it, but in the end somebody at Verisign can make a unilateral split second decision to shut down any domain they want. Who's to stop them?
I would suggest it be part of your contract that they won't do this to your domain without a court order and notifying you first. Otherwise find a different registrar.
1. Re:What stops them from actually doing it? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 10:08 · Score: 0
  
  Pray tell, what registrar offers such terms?
  Further, what registrar offers such terms and includes a promise not to cave to a single phone call from FBI/DHS/ICE/RIAA/MPAA or other asshat organization?
2. Re:What stops them from actually doing it? by Kalriath · 2011-10-13 13:53 · Score: 1
  
  Verisign controls .com and .net. Frankly, no registrar can do anything to prevent Verisign shutting down your domain.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
3. Re:What stops them from actually doing it? by razol · 2011-10-18 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  "Otherwise find a different registrar." Brilliant, but VeriSign is a registry, and there is no alternative registry for .com and .net. You cannot registry shop within a gTLD. The registrars are all beholden to their registry overlords.
or more realistically by nimbius · 2011-10-13 11:00 · Score: 1

the weekly multilevel department meeting included caffeinated coffee this time, forcing all in attendance to reconsider things like domain suspension, repainting the parking lot into one great big parking space, and reassigning the gender and sexual preferences of the copy machine.

--
Good people go to bed earlier.
Too bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 11:04 · Score: 0

Many of the popular Registries have this ability, and use it everyday to take down sites serving up malware and phish. There is an extensive investigation done before a domain is suspended- the Registry loses money when it is suspended. Too bad, really, I was looking forward to having another tool in the box to fight crime on the internet, but instead must beg a shady ISP to take action...tin foil hats- 1, internet crime fighters- 0.
Good by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 15:22 · Score: 0

Thank God
Who really 1 - wasn't us. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-10-13 15:55 · Score: 0

Spammers 1.
Hijackers 1.
1. Re:Who really 1 - wasn't us. by tomofumi · 2011-10-13 20:38 · Score: 1
  
  ...and phisherman +1 too...
A Moose Bit My Sister by Scarletdown · 2011-10-13 21:52 · Score: 1

We at Verisign apologize for the silly proposal we had proposed. Those twits responsible have been sacked.

--
This space unintentionally left blank.
1. Re:A Moose Bit My Sister by Anomalyst · 2011-10-14 03:23 · Score: 1
  
  Can we arrange for them to be bitten by a Møøse?
  Mynd you, møøse bites Kan be pretty nasti.
  
  --
  There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.