| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
 ICANN opens forum on new TLD applications
posted by michael on Monday April 05 2004, @07:06PM
IDP Highlights writes " ICANN opens forum on new top-level domain applications --The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers has opened an online forum to discuss ten applications for new sponsored top-level domains (sTLD's), including .asia, .cat (for Catalonia), .jobs, .mail, .mobi (for mobile devices), .post and .xxx, as well as two applications for .tel. ICANN has also mentioned that it will funnel "spam and off-topic postings" into special archives, although it is not clear what criteria the organization will use to determine whether a given message should be placed in such categories."
[Update (11/6): I'm reliably informed that ".cat is for the Catalan language and cultural community, not for the territory.
So, .cat is for Catalan not for Catalonia..." (Trust me, some people care about the distinction) -mf]
|
|
|
|
| |
[ 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. ]
|
|
| | |
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
ICANN opens forum on new TLD applications
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 22 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
|
ICANN has an odd definition of what is relevant. For example, ICANN's so-called "webmaster", in conjunction with ICANN's then "President" decided that none of the materials I wrote during my term, despite repeated requests, should be posted on ICANN's website despite the fact that they routinely posted pretty much everything authored by other directors.
I doubt that ICANN would bother to consider comments that concern technical matters - such as my comment on .mobi at http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000091.htm l [cavebear.com] - because it's technical in nature. And ICANN seems to have made it its business to avoid anything technical and concern itself only with those things that regulate the business and economic use of the DNS.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Either their spam filtering isn't working, or the post forum just won the Spanish Lottery...
http://forum.icann.org/lists/stld-rfp-post/msg0000 0.html
You might very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Given the very low number of comments, it's pretty evident that these TLDs lack public support.
Compare the number of comments posted in support of these new TLDs to those received for the Stop VeriSign DNS Abuse [whois.sc] petition, or the Recall VeriSign [recallverisign.com] petition, or even that spoke against WLS [icann.org].
Of course, if there ends up being 1 comment for a particular TLD, out of 1 comment total received, the fork and spoon operators from ICANN will declare "unanimous support!"
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
ICann's email comment forums for the new sTld's is loaded everyday with new Worms and Virii attachments. It appears They don't know how to Pre-screen posts or stop Virii spam being spread from ICANN.Org.
I wonder how many People have clicked on these Live attachments by mistake. Yes they do remove these off topic posts eventually. But most are live for many hours.
Seems Odd ICANN's is now distributing Virii/Worms To the World.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
You raise an intriguing point - should ICANN's new TLDs be subject to challange, and subsequent transfer or cancelation, under ICANN's own UDRP.
Certainly ICANN's adoption of .biz (despite a pre-existing TLD by the same name) turns up numerous hits on the USPT0's web site.
Same for "mobi" - there are preexisting trademarks.
Same for "cat" and "post" and "aero" and ... well just about all of 'em.
Perhaps ICANN ought to finally realize that the UDRP is a disaster, a supranational law created by the IP industry to expand their rights, made through a process that actively excluded other concerned parties.
But even if ICANN doesn't have such a revelation, they ought to be willing to live by the rules they impose on others and allow TLDs to be challanged by ICANN's own UDRP processes.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| | | 2 replies beneath your current threshold. |
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
|
