Should the US gov Retain Control over TLD’s?
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=30&ContentID=46307
***FS*** A great question with no simple answer. I have long viewed domain names as synonymous with “the Internet” .. No domain names, no Internet.. Buy all the domain names, control the Internet. Overly simplistic perhaps, but there is certainly some truth to the theory. I would prefer to see a US centric Internet.. “The Internet” would not have thrived, the way it has if naming were run by less-free societies such China or Russia or India or Brazil.. or God help us.. the UN.
Hrmm - there are a few countries now that I believe are deemed to be more ‘free’ than the US.
I also think the UN gets a really bad rep. They have done excellent work in the telecommunications field in setting standards and the like. Just because FEMA is incompetent doesn’t mean some other branch of the US government is incompetent - and I believe the same applies to the UN
“I have long viewed domain names as synonymous with “the Internet” ..”
There was a day and age when people viewed DOS as “synonymous” with PC…
As users are one-by-one pushed one more B0X away
from the C0RE network, they begin to see a very
different “Internet”…
The owners of that Set-Top-B0X then control the
name-space they use…when the .COM is dropped
the Generic Words become fair game…only the
strong brands survive…during THE Clinton’s
last orgy they decided that there would be 5,000
strong brands, that number has not changed…as
long as the B0X operators protect the Fortune
5000 they will be viewed as the heros for saving
the name space…
The 3-Letter members of the Fortune 5000 are
headed to RIO to rub shoulders with the ITU,
WTO, IOC, ACM, USA, EDU, ORG, INT, ETC to all
protect their TLDs…
“I have long viewed domain names as synonymous with ‘the Internet’”
That strikes me as similar to saying that book titles are synonymous with literature.