Live data from Hacker News

Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

en.mercopress.com

101–110 of 169 posts

Re: Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

#101
post #61

Fun article, but they will get it back with relative ease. Happens all the time. Trademark domain.

Is it still a trademark violation if they use the domain to sell something completely unrelated, e.g. shoes?

The problem with this is that Google isn't some generic term for something else. A lot of case law around this kind of stuff. Will get transferred back to Google in a heartbeat.

Re: Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

#102
post #86
post #51

Meanwhile, I can't even figure out how to buy domains with my name in them from people who just buy them and sit on them.

The internet's implementation of name resolving is wrong. If you type "apple.com" you should get a disambiguation page saying "Did you mean the grocery store, the record company, or the computer company?" and from there you can reach the desired website. Somewhat like how it works in Wikipedia. Unlike land, names are not a scarcity and can be shared. So why pretend they are like land?

> names are not a scarcity and can be shared

Domain names cannot be effectively shared between non-cooperating entities. Someone has to own the DNS A/AAAA/CNAME/etc records, and be able to change them at will. They have to point to someone's server. It doesn't matter what technological implementation underpins name resolution, it's a fundamentally important property that it must be possible to have exclusive ownership of a domain name.

If I'm trying to reach my bank, I need to know that I'm talking to my bank, and we have a whole technological stack designed to ensure that, including cryptographic authentication and public logs (Certificate Transparency) to make sure nobody can secretly tamper with that authentication.

Any system that cannot provide such authentication is not a viable naming scheme.

There's a long-standing concept that has been discussed many times that naming could be based entirely on that cryptographic authentication, without having any kind of "human-readable" name at all. However, such a system would not solve the full problem that needs solving; it would just mean there would then need to be a separate directory system to help people find the server they actually want and then talk securely to that server.

Re: Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but Google wouldn’t want any part of that type of arrangement. Better to let it go un-associated with the country than to depend on some other party that can extort at renewal time.

Can’t Domain name providers do pretty much the same thing? You’re only leasing a domain after all...

They generally have a reputation to uphold so others don't just get up and leave.

Some rando leasing it to you can do whatever they want without worrying about any of that.

Re: Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

#105
post #82
post #79

It's not quite google.ar, but I'm still trying to figure out what to do with https://gnu.gl/

If GNU Project ever wanted to run a free Google alternative, GNUgl at gnu.gl would be a great fit.

Once they become a community project, rather than the rms fan club, I'll talk to them.

Re: Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

#106
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet's implementation of name resolving is wrong. If you type "apple.com" you should get a disambiguation page saying "Did you mean the grocery store, the record company, or the computer company?" and from there you can reach the desired website. Somewhat like how it works in Wikipedia. Unlike land, names are not a scarcity and can be shared. So why pretend they are like land?

> names are not a scarcity and can be shared Domain names cannot be effectively shared between non-cooperating entities. Someone has to own the DNS A/AAAA/CNAME/etc records, and be able to change them at will. They have to point to someone's server. It doesn't matter what technological implementation underpins name resolution, it's a fundamentally important property that it must be possible to have exclusive ownershi…

.com is shared, and .apple.com can be shared across multiple subdomains in the same way. We already have that eg. co, gov etc. The registrar would have to maintain the link lists and host them on apple.com for you to choose. You would get a subdomain which you can manage.

Re: Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

#107

I recently sold cryptocomicbook.com and decided to list some additional domains for sale, at the exact time I listed them a handful of ua.(TLDs) got listed for sale including ua.com and whoever listed them must have done it in bulk and given them all the same price ($76). So I bought the ua.com for $76, at that point the seller must have realized what happened and immediately changed the sales price of all the other…

Why should I believe in markets when transactions can just be reversed like this?

Re: Argentine version of Google falls into “wrong” hands

#109
post #63

Google probably threatened to abuse poor guy with legal action. Similar to what MSFT did to the guy who totally legally registered mikerowesoft.com

> In the end, Microsoft and Mike Rowe came to an agreement. In exchange for transferring control of his domain name, the software maker has promised to help Rowe set up a new Web site; pay for a Microsoft certification course and subscription to the Microsoft Developer Network Web site; and pay for his family to visit Microsoft Research Tech Fest in Redmond, Wash., in March. To top it all off, he will get an Xbox with some games.

From cnet: https://www.cnet.com/news/mikerowesoft-settles-for-an-xbox/

He did an AMA on reddit 11 years ago; he's apparently a full time poker player now. https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ajsih/i_am_the_guy_wh...

Post reply on HN