ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    Country-Code Top Level Domains (ccTLDs) .US Registry Deleting Domain Names Retroactively!!
    posted by michael on Thursday August 15 2002, @03:24AM

    Ron_Bennett writes "I've been busy much of the summer, but recently I noticed that one of my .US domains (FuckCensorship.US [whois record]) that was *successfully* registered and functional for months stopped working and appears to be in the process of being deleted!!

    It appears the .US NIC has chosen to delete numerous domains - could be in the tens of thousands that contain one or more of the "7 dirty" words along with others too from what I've been told. For as bad as NSI was years ago, I don't recall them retroactively deleting domains like NeuLevel is currently in the process of doing in .US."




    The United States claims to be the land of freedom and yet the .US ccTLD is going to delete FuckCensorship.US domain along with many others.

    It's a sad commentary when one can register so-called "dirty" domains in many ccTLDs including .NU and .CC, but not in the .US. Heck, I've even found some "dirty" domains registered in .RU (Russia!!). Anyways, I'm really dismayed that a country that claims to have so much freedom seems to have less and less all the time.

    Some may think "who cares"...keep in mind that .US Registry's action reiterates again that registrants in many ccTLDs assume much risk of losing their domains for nefarious reasons at any time with little to no recourse. So while .US Registry is deleting "dirty" domains at the moment, they could at any time delete other domains too; especially those of a controversial nature or linked to information that government officials didn't like.

    Lastly, anyone with a .US domain registration should ensure they also have the matching (or at least similar) domain in another ccTLD or better yet in a gTLD such as in .COM, .NET, .INFO, or .ORG. Anyone who relies solely on their .US domain functioning without interruption could one day see their site go dark! And for anyone considering registering in .US...one word: Don't!! There are better and more secure TLD choices out there.

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
  • FuckCensorship.US
  • whois record
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    .US Registry Deleting Domain Names Retroactively!! | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 41 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: .US Registry Deleting Domain Names Retroactive
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Thursday August 15 2002, @04:28AM (#8488)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    Bret Fausett pointed me to this ICANN Blog item and this .us policy, which I admit I'd forgotten about. I have some doubts about the legality of this policy, although the fact that its been laundered through a contractor (the usual US-domain-name-policy strategy) makes a lawsuit that much more complex and uncertain. Indeed, if there's no evidence that the policy was encouraged either overtly or covertly by the government (and I wasn't paying any attention to this issue, so I have no idea what the facts are), then the NSI precedent suggests that a court would not find this to be illegal.

    My meta-view remains the same old boring song: none of this would matter if there were a constant stream of new TLDs with varying policies. In that world, we'd appreciate having a few TLDs with restrictive policies, even (perish the thought) a few with *web content restrictions* they would police. If there were a multiplicity of competitive open and closed domains, this just wouldn't be an issue.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: .US Registry Deleting Domain Names Retroactive
    by lextext on Thursday August 15 2002, @05:21AM (#8492)
    User #6 Info | http://www.lextext.com
    "...this policy has been developed in direct consultation with the U.S. Department of Commerce..."

    -- Bret

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: .US Registry Deleting Domain Names Retroactive
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Thursday August 15 2002, @12:00PM (#8513)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    Move out of your house and find another one, fool.

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Stop your whining
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Thursday August 15 2002, @12:45PM (#8515)
    User #2810 Info
    My reading of the policy is that registrants of such deleted names will have their money refunded. And, I do think it is the consumer's job (particularily in the US) to talk to Commerce. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Stop your whining
    by unsolicited (unsolicited@audomainnews.info) on Thursday August 15 2002, @10:50PM (#8527)
    User #3378 Info | www.audomainnews.info
    That's ICANN's job? This is a country code that does not have a contract with ICANN. ICANN has no role currently in the administration of .us.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: .US Registry Deleting Domain Names Retroactive
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Friday August 16 2002, @07:00AM (#8547)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    If sour grapes means pointing out an argument that is rediculous on its face, then sour grapes it is.

    Those who say there is no demand are merely trying to maintain the artificial scarcity that props up the value of their speculated domains, or their registries. I suspect that quite a few anonymous posters, like yourself, work for Afilias or Neulevel or Verisign.

    If there is no demand, then new registries will go out of business. The market takes care of itself. In no other market are such protections enacted.

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: .US Registry Deleting Domain Names Retroactive
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Wednesday August 21 2002, @05:00AM (#8622)
    User #2810 Info
    Hey Jay, where you been hiding since domain policy went away? Always enjoyed your views even if I sometimes disagreed. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com