| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
WHOIS Report Punts on Privacy
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 13 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Well, it has always been my position that .com domains are intended for commercial use, and any other use of them is really abuse.
While I oppose any attempt to retroactively impose any sort of registration restrictions on .com, .net, or .org, since doing this to a currently open-registration domain would be impractical and unfair (I said this back when the possibility of .org restrictions was "in the air", and still hold this position), I do support the tailoring of policies for the different TLDs to the type of users for which they are intended.
Thus, .com should have policies appropriate for commercial use, such as requiring public WHOIS information, while a TLD intended specifically for individuals (e.g., .name) deserves a much more privacy-friendly policy.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re:As it always was
by dtobias
|
|
|
|
|
How does one "use" a domain name?
Remember, all that a domain name is a key into a database. And the records under that key are of multiple types (only one of which is for IP addresses) and for each type there may be multiple instances.
And then, if one looks only at DNS through the peephole of assuming that all it is used for is IP addresses, then one needs to consider that an IP address simply denotes an interface on a computer and that computer may be offering a myriad of services, only one of which may be world-wide-web.
So the concept of using DNS as a taxinomy is technically flawed from the outset - there is simply too much ambiguity. And there is no linkage beyond serindipity between domain name records and server services and content.
A much better approach is to not to try to use DNS as a directory. Instead, one should build real directories.
By-the-way, even before there was DNS there was the AUP - the Appropriate Use Policy. And way back in the 70's we kinda knew that host names ending with .edu and .org and .net and .mil all tended to do things within the AUP, but things with .com were in unknown territory - not necessarily commercial, but simply not clearly under the AUP.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
your remarks don't really make much sense: you 'oppose any attempt to retroactively impose any sort of registration restrictions on .com, .net, or .org,' and yet -- ignoring years of actual usage, in which .com was NOT treated as an imprimatur of commercial activity -- say that '.com should have policies appropriate for commercial use.' i agree that it makes sense to 'tailor policies for the different TLDs to the type of users for which they are intended' *if* that encompasses effectively unregulated TLDs. personally, i'd like to see a .non where IPR are presumed NOT to apply. but of course the IPR zealots can't tolerate exceptionalism except insofar as it benefits them.
cheers,
t
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
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
|
