Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ICANN is wrong

scripting.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–94 of 94 posts

Re: ICANN is wrong

#91

Post by davewiner »

dfc wrote: post #63
davewiner wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay I'll cover it here (although I did elsewhere in this thread). Maybe those domains shouldn't have been issued, but they were. And that's why you want to deal with these things before you get an installed base, not after.

You did not cover it...What is the harm of having a .poetry TLD? Or what are the personal+societal costs of the private/exclusive registration of poetry.com? But you are right we should deal with these things before there is a large user base. So let's sort it out now and come up with a solid framework for what alphanumeric strings are acceptable. What are the rules? Which alpha-numeric strings are too important to l…

Doug, just leave the whole thing alone and worry about solving real problems not invented ones.

Re: ICANN is wrong

#92

Post by billpatrianakos »

adventureful wrote: post #87
billpatrianakos wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's simple, really. A domain name like poetry.com is as accessible to the average person as it is to a company. A TLD on the other hand is something you need to take out a mortgage to own. The difference is in the democracy of it all. Acquiring domain names is a very democratic process even if you take into account squatting and other shenanigans. Scrounge up ten bucks and a web connection and it's yours. TLDs aren'…

And how many mortgages do you suppose it would take to buy poetry.com? It's not even close to accessible to the average person. Maybe if the average person saved every penny they earn for a lifetime, they could buy poetry.com.

Yes but domain names that are unclaimed all start at the same price. Now poetry.com is unattainable but before it was bought anyone who wanted it had an equal chance. TLDs are starting their life as unattainable unlike domains which only end up that way later.

Re: ICANN is wrong

#93

Post by quag »

davewiner wrote: post #35
larrys wrote: post #18

"How does Google get the right to capture all the goodwill generated in the word blog? They are not the exclusive owner of it, as they are with the name Google. However they claim the right to become that owner, by paying $185K to ICANN. Nowhere in their proposal is an offer to pay money to the people who created the idea that they would take over. And what if the creators aren't willing to sell it to them? permalink…

It's not entirely different, but those were the rules everyone was playing by then. So in that sense it's very different. We haven't agreed to these new rules yet. I don't think we should. Hopefully that's not too subtle.

What about a kid who was born in 1997 and who is now turning 15? They didn't get a chance to play by the same rules as you did.

Re: ICANN is wrong

#94

Post by BadLogInMyAss »

Misguided argument. TLD limitations should've been abolished altogether. A domain name should be able to end in any string, and registered by any registrar.

ICANN't has turned this idea into a massive scam and rip-off, squandering the opportunity to take TLDs to their logical conclusion and end this fake, asinine domain-name "shortage."

Post reply on HN