(Some people will probably be offended by parts of this comment, as it contains rather harsh statements about the way the USA is handling the Internet, which I view as an _international_ network. So if you're likely to take offense by such views, please skip this comment, and read someone else's, this isn't good for your heart condition.)
---------------
This comment comes in three parts:
1) USA's laws and court rulings, and their validity on the Internet 2) Trademarks and Internet domain names 3) What about Network Solution, Inc, and domain name registry?
--------------- 1) USA's laws and court rulings, and their validity on the Internet
Is the Internet something where only the laws of the United States of America count, and something which only the USA has jurisdiction over?
I think not.
And it bugs me a bit that few appears to see this, even among those of you posting comments here.
It is more than twenty years since the Internet became an international phenomenon, and perhaps it's time that the USA -- government and all -- start to realise that, and stop pretending that USA's laws and court rulings can be valid for something that is a world-wide affair.
Sure, I incidentally registered "my" domain name under the _international_.org with Internic, which incidentally is run by Network Solutions, Inc, the USA based company. But I can't really see how I, as a registrant of an international domain, can be expected to know and follow the USA's trademarking laws, nor to know which companies have registered which trademarks in the USA. And I don't have much of a choice when registering an international domain name, do I, if I intend for it to be useful?
We might as well give up the DNS services, split the Internet in national pieces (good thing for European ISPs, who wouln't have to pay for the costly lines across the pond anymore), and avoid the problem altogether, because it's absolutely intolerable that the USA should decide for the rest of the world in this case, as in any other.
An international network must not and can not be run by one government.
--------------- 2) Trademarks and Internet domain names
What about trademarks, then? Should we just ignore them?
Yes.
Trademarks don't prove anything, except for who got there first, and how the people registering them felt that day.
Some people may still remember a company named Apple, founded by the Beatles, which tried to prevent Apple, founded by you-know-who, from using that particular name. That didn't work, because Apple and Apple were in different markets. Now, how do we solve that, when Apple and Apple aren't so much in different markets anymore? And, as others have pointed out, who has the better right to apple.com? The oldest (Apple in music) or the presumably biggest (Apple in computers)?
Other questions arising are: What should happen if a domain name has been registered by an organization which _hasn't_ registered that particular name as a trademark, and some years after, someone else registers it? Should the traditional organization, known world wide for its name, have to give it up, just because it was trademarked in, say, India, by some hitherto unknown company, or a company who decided to release a product by that name?
The solution is really, really simple, although I feel that I'm repeating myself here:
Don't accept trademarks as a reason for a "right" to domain names at all.
There is no way -- currently -- to keep track of all the trademarks used in the world, and likewise no way to determine a really fair outcome of disputes. Taking such things to court is a painfully obvious mistake, and the court where such a case appears should recognize that.
--------------- 3) What about Network Solution, Inc, and domain name registry?
It's definitely time for Network Solution Inc's reign in the kingdom of international domain name registry to end.
I think the stewardship for international domain names should be split up, and shared between non-profit organizations of at least two different continents, maybe three (Asia, Europe, North America), and with room for expansion later (Africa, Oceania, South America?).
This should provide better redundancy in case of failure, it should split the workload, and it should make the reliability of things such as the trans-atlantic links less important for domain name registry.
Coordinating between two, three or four different sites isn't that difficult, as long as one allows for at sufficient time (twenty-four hours?) to check for registration collisions (semaphores, anyone?).
Shall we get started?
---------------
These were, of course, just my personal opinions. Treat them as you like, but please ask before you quote me somewhere else than here on /., okay?:)
On my MUD, someone bough a "generation" for something like USD 100-200, too.
I'd not be surprised if someone would sell/buy a high level character for higher amounts.
There are addicts everywhere...
Oh, and there's more around on MUDs than the journey. It's also the joy of creation, and the feeling you get when the mortals for once actually think you did something cool.
Slashdot Mirror
(Some people will probably be offended by parts of this comment, as it
.org with Internic, which incidentally is run by
:)
contains rather harsh statements about the way the USA is handling the
Internet, which I view as an _international_ network. So if you're
likely to take offense by such views, please skip this comment, and
read someone else's, this isn't good for your heart condition.)
---------------
This comment comes in three parts:
1) USA's laws and court rulings, and their validity on the Internet
2) Trademarks and Internet domain names
3) What about Network Solution, Inc, and domain name registry?
---------------
1) USA's laws and court rulings, and their validity on the Internet
Is the Internet something where only the laws of the United States of
America count, and something which only the USA has jurisdiction over?
I think not.
And it bugs me a bit that few appears to see this, even among those of
you posting comments here.
It is more than twenty years since the Internet became an
international phenomenon, and perhaps it's time that the USA --
government and all -- start to realise that, and stop pretending that
USA's laws and court rulings can be valid for something that is a
world-wide affair.
Sure, I incidentally registered "my" domain name under the
_international_
Network Solutions, Inc, the USA based company. But I can't really see
how I, as a registrant of an international domain, can be expected to
know and follow the USA's trademarking laws, nor to know which
companies have registered which trademarks in the USA. And I don't
have much of a choice when registering an international domain name,
do I, if I intend for it to be useful?
We might as well give up the DNS services, split the Internet in
national pieces (good thing for European ISPs, who wouln't have to pay
for the costly lines across the pond anymore), and avoid the problem
altogether, because it's absolutely intolerable that the USA should
decide for the rest of the world in this case, as in any other.
An international network must not and can not be run by one
government.
---------------
2) Trademarks and Internet domain names
What about trademarks, then? Should we just ignore them?
Yes.
Trademarks don't prove anything, except for who got there first, and
how the people registering them felt that day.
Some people may still remember a company named Apple, founded by the
Beatles, which tried to prevent Apple, founded by you-know-who, from
using that particular name. That didn't work, because Apple and Apple
were in different markets. Now, how do we solve that, when Apple and
Apple aren't so much in different markets anymore? And, as others have
pointed out, who has the better right to apple.com? The oldest (Apple
in music) or the presumably biggest (Apple in computers)?
Other questions arising are: What should happen if a domain name has
been registered by an organization which _hasn't_ registered that
particular name as a trademark, and some years after, someone else
registers it? Should the traditional organization, known world wide
for its name, have to give it up, just because it was trademarked in,
say, India, by some hitherto unknown company, or a company who decided
to release a product by that name?
The solution is really, really simple, although I feel that I'm
repeating myself here:
Don't accept trademarks as a reason for a "right" to domain names at
all.
There is no way -- currently -- to keep track of all the trademarks
used in the world, and likewise no way to determine a really fair
outcome of disputes. Taking such things to court is a painfully
obvious mistake, and the court where such a case appears should
recognize that.
---------------
3) What about Network Solution, Inc, and domain name registry?
It's definitely time for Network Solution Inc's reign in the kingdom
of international domain name registry to end.
I think the stewardship for international domain names should be split
up, and shared between non-profit organizations of at least two
different continents, maybe three (Asia, Europe, North America), and
with room for expansion later (Africa, Oceania, South America?).
This should provide better redundancy in case of failure, it should
split the workload, and it should make the reliability of things such
as the trans-atlantic links less important for domain name registry.
Coordinating between two, three or four different sites isn't that
difficult, as long as one allows for at sufficient time (twenty-four
hours?) to check for registration collisions (semaphores, anyone?).
Shall we get started?
---------------
These were, of course, just my personal opinions. Treat them as you
like, but please ask before you quote me somewhere else than here on
/., okay?
Heh.
On my MUD, someone bough a "generation" for something like USD 100-200, too.
I'd not be surprised if someone would sell/buy a high level character for higher amounts.
There are addicts everywhere...
Oh, and there's more around on MUDs than the journey. It's also the joy of creation, and the feeling you get when the mortals for once actually think you did something cool.
Yes, and Lynx -- even running in 8 instances in 8 xterms under X -- won't make it swap as
easily as 8 Navigator windows would.
Navigator under Windows isn't happy about having 8 windows open either.
Your point was what, to compare browsers?
> If they're so smart, why don't they move outta the flood plain?
Maybe because there are three times as many of them as there are of the merkans.
It only stands to reason that they should not only have more geniouses, but also more idiots (unless the US is a very exceptional case).
So, maybe you should take your foot and its rather humid surroundings somewhere else...