All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
ICANN and Verisign Proposal Would Allow Any Government In The World To Seize Domain Names
treesmokah
Member
ICANN, the organization that regulates global domain name policy, and Verisign, the abusive monopolist that operates the .COM and .NET top-level domains, have quietly proposed enormous changes to global domain name policy in their recently published “Proposed Renewal of the Registry Agreement for .NET”, which is now open for public comment.
Either by design, or unintentionally, they’ve proposed allowing any government in the world to cancel, redirect, or transfer to their control applicable domain names! This is an outrageous and dangerous proposal that must be stopped. While this proposal is currently only for .NET domain names, presumably they would want to also apply it to other extensions like .COM as those contracts come up for renewal.
https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-would-allow-any-government-in-the-world-to-seize-domain-names/ (A1, A2)
Comments
what
the
fuck
Isn't that very very very far-reached?
The document literally says that Verisign reserves the right to take action on a domain after a legal order by any government - not, like the title or the thread says, that any government gets a UI where they can login and remove any domain from ever existing.
ICANN and Verisign Proposal Would Allow Any Government In The World To Seize Domain Names - Wrong, it would allow governments to ask Verisign to seize them, not for governments to do so
Either by design, or unintentionally, they’ve proposed allowing any government in the world to cancel, redirect, or transfer to their control applicable domain names! - Wrong, it would allow governments to ask Verisign to seize them, not for governments to do so
Holy fuck. Who thought this is a good idea?
It seems like you're the only one at LET who actually read before post.
On the other hand, it seems also like people aren't that upset as long as that's the privilege kept by their .gov only.
I don't see the text of it as particularly unusual, unprecedented, or egregious. Government seizing domains is nothing new. But just like "net neutrality," you only need strong headlines and scary words to get the outrage machine turning.
I mean, the idea that they would find themselves in the position to comply with "applicable law" is one of the most fundamental requirements of any human that exists in any jurisdiction. Note that they didn't say "inapplicable law" now that would be offensive.
I, too, am bound by applicable law. Even a remote tribe is bound by applicable law, though the law which is applicable to them might appear archaic 😂
I get where they're coming from in reading it, but their interpretation sounds like a college freshman reading his or her first legal document. They're extracting words and phrases as though their mere existence in sequence means what they think it means, which is a watered down version of what it actually means that excluded the context of the words around it.
You better remove that footage of president Salva Kiir Mayardit road inauguration incident from your website before South Sudan Ministry of Information sees it and deals with you like they did with six others.
So US.gov is not the only one who can do it now? cool cool
there are still free tld networks around, which could not be seized https://wiki.opennic.org/start
Fwiw, I once bought a .nft/Web3 domain for the fun of it a while back. Maybe control over the domain is one of the few advantages crypto domains have.
At least the way I understood it, the domain can't just be shut down as it's minted on the blockchain. Of course, that doesn't mean govt entities (or other bodies) couldn't find ways to force me to shut it down if they wanted to.
I previously obtained www.ipfs from Epik, but it appears that it can only be accessed through their Anonymize Network. As a result, I requested a refund. Currently, the issue I am facing with obtaining a web3 domain is that they do not share the same authoritative DNS.
Ah yes, I too love domains which aren't resolvable unless you change your DNS resolvers. Totally not an idea which has been implemented in the past, and for free.
Oh wait.
But seriously, I dislike that these domains are offered to be purchased in regular registrars, coupled with the rest of the TLDs, when they're only accessible with special extensions/DNS changes. But I guess it sells...
Yeah, I basically experienced the same issues. A while ago, I opened a topic in LE Forums to see if people could access my web3 website and only those with Brave Browser, custom dns, or browser extension from UD could. It's definitely lacking in some ways and not to be confused with regular TLDs, but I didn't buy it to host a website anyway. Bought it for the fun of it (try out web3) and to maybe sell it off one day..anyway I don't regret the couple of bucks I spent. Hosting an IPFS placeholder site on it atm.
What they do? They also do it internationally?
Check out Lokinet, a network similar to tor/i2p which has its own decentralized domain names and you can use all records. Of course everything is end to end encrypted and anonymized, it can also route pretty much any ip traffic(unlike tor - which can only do tcp).
There are many other cool things in it, but I don't want to bloat this thread.
That's cool, but I'm struggling to locate a platform to buy a domain.
You can do it using their Oxen wallets, its their blockchain which is powered by nodes that also rely Lokinet traffic.
https://github.com/oxen-io/oxen-electron-gui-wallet
Oh, cool. I will take a look at it. Thanks