ICANN is now just another concession stand that makes money by keeping the users of the Information Highway stuck in line at its toll booths.
Iâve become philosophical about XXX et al and view the domain names as accidental strings. I wanted a short name so I leased (of course, not owned) rmf.vc. I recommended eComm use eComm.ec. If someone wants to pay a lot for .XXX so be it but it might not be as important as when domains were new and exciting and were mostly â.COMâ.
The real problem is not with .XXX but the fact that we have a fatally flawed Procrustean system in the heart of the Internet. It guarantees our links must unravel as the leases expire thus undermining the long term stability of the Internet. Itâs as if we had the library of Alexandria but let it smolder turning all our knowledge to ash over time.
The tragedy is that the DNS displaces alternative mechanisms which would give us stable identifiers we can coin ourselves without depending on a central authority. The DNS should be just another application outside the plumbing of the network â just like Skype names or Google searches.
So the XXX domain matters little even if naÃve legislators might try to establish a red light district on the Internet. We should be more concerned about the DNS itself.
We should be very concerned that reforms such as decentralizing addressing and naming would threaten ICANNâs very profitable sinecure.
From: Dave Farber [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 20:25
Subject: [IP] re ICANN Likely to Approve "Dot-Ex-Ex-Ex" Domain for Chumps!
FWIW this debate has gone since before ICANN was created. It was dumb in 1996 and everyone could articulate all the reasons back then even before "I know it when I see it". It boggles the mind that ICANN, with access to all the commentary over the years, still manages to get it 'wrong' absent even a compelling 'hint' (let alone reason) that anything has changed? At least make the pretence of "well this has changed so we revisit"?
SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin phone: (613) 794-5356
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Dave Farber <email@example.com> wrote:
From: Lauren Weinstein <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: June 24, 2010 5:29:58 PM EDT
Subject: ICANN Likely to Approve "Dot-Ex-Ex-Ex" Domain for Chumps!
ICANN Likely to Approve "Dot-Ex-Ex-Ex" Domain for Chumps!
Greetings. Word is that tomorrow ICANN is likely to reverse itself
yet again, and (under continuing lawsuit threats from the would-be
TLD-operator who desperately wants to cash-in on this fiasco)
unwisely approve a "dot-ex-ex-ex" top-level domain
( http://bit.ly/aXdX4k [IBTimes] ).
Every word that I wrote back in 2005 about this topic, in "Open
Letter: Why 'Dot-Ex-Ex-Ex' is for Chumps" still holds true, perhaps
even more now half a decade later
( http://bit.ly/bRtaFj [Lauren's Blog] ).
If ICANN moves as reported on this, it is bad news for everyone
concerned about free speech and civil liberties on and off the
Internet, regardless of how you feel about the sorts of enterprises
being targeted by this new TLD.
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
- Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org
Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition
for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com