4 ms·
Well that was abrupt. I was just getting into it, hit pagedown, and promptly hit the bottom of the page where the EU was dismissed and Iceland promptly declared
by lucb1e 5y ago
Well that was abrupt. I was just getting into it, hit pagedown, and promptly hit the bottom of the page where the EU was dismissed and Iceland promptly declared victorious (together with .onion to which no laws apply in the first place).
What's wrong with Switzerland? Norway? I know very little about Chad or Japan or Micronesia, perhaps they have great TLD rules as well? Heck, what even was the issue with the EU in the first place? I can think of GDPR as being seen as problematic in some constrained context, but privacy rules don't apply to TLD ownership so this reader is just left wondering.
- novok 5y agoThey kind of do actually, most TLDs AFAIK need to resolve to some sort of registered person or organization eventually.
- lucb1e 5y agoIs Iceland the only country that does not? This would have been interesting info for the article.
- tephra 5y agoAccording to ISNICs bylaws they do have a dispute mechanism: Article 31 A Board of Appeals handles disputes regarding the registration of domains. The Board of Appeals is autonomous and independent. ISNIC carries out decisions of the Board within 10 days after they have been passed or on the next business day thereafter, if the current registrant does not accept the verdict. ISNIC will not carry out the Board of Appeal's judgements if legal proceedings have been instigated in respect of the same issue or an injunction been placed on the use of the domain in question before the Board of Appeals has reached a decision. Cases involving the registration of domains or refusal to register domains may be referred to the Board of Appeals.
- foxfluff 5y agoI have domains on a European ccTLD. This is what they "resolve to": holder.............: Private person registrar..........: Private person The registrar's name (that's me) used to be visible but that changed with stronger privacy requirements, soon after GDPR. European trademark & hate speech laws (plus dns blocking of various domains associated with pornography or piracy) probably still apply so .is could be a free-er choice.
- lucb1e 5y agoIt's still registered though. Check any .nl domain on https://sidn.nl/en https://sidn.nl/en (you could try to put 'rop' in the 'check domain name' box), you just need to set a checkmark and agree to the Google terms of service to resolve their captcha and off you go.
- foxfluff 5y agoOf course a domain is registered if it's registered. It's just that different countries offer different degrees of privacy for the holder.
- lucb1e 5y agoSure but I mean it's centrally registered in the central WHOIS database. Of course the registrar has whatever data you put in their order form, that's obvious enough; what I mean is that they still forward your personal info to a central registry and the only thing GDPR changed about the WHOIS database is output filtering, or in SIDN's case not even that. I find it totally weird and invasive that this must be centrally registered in the first place (I grew up with my parents telling me not to use my real name anywhere online, let alone put it in a public database; maybe the problem is that I wanted a domain as a teenager and now it weirds me out?). Using privacy options means my paid-for domain is now not legally mine and I can't make use of any dispute procedure because the registry organisation has nothing in place for when my real name is not tracked in their database.
- 5y ago
- SpelingBeeChamp 5y agoI had an interesting experience with the registrar of a less-known ccTLD. I was happy to get my company’s three-letter domain at a fitting ccTLD, and had reluctantly accepted that the TLD doesn’t allow WHOIS privacy. Shortly thereafter I was straightening out a name server issue out with my registrar and I mentioned the WHOIS privacy bummer. Their response was something like “Oh, no problem. I’ll change it.” Our WHOIS entry now has our registrar’s version of “Domains by Proxy” as the contact, despite the ccTLD not allowing Whois privacy. (And it was free.)
- croes 5y agoYou do realize the article is referencing the linked EFF comparison? https://www.eff.org/files/2017/08/02/domain_registry_whitepaper.pdf https://www.eff.org/files/2017/08/02/domain_registry_whitepa... Then only the TLDs are listed which "only avenue for domain takedown is through a local court, rather than through an arbitrator order or trusted notifier". Additionally countries that are part of the 5 eyes, 9 eyes or 15 eyes, see picture at the top of the article, are out, too. For the EU part, I think it has to do with the EU tendency of surveillance laws. On the one hand the EU claims privacy and security as a main goal and the other hand they try to backdoor E2E encrypted messengers.
- lucb1e 5y agoAh, no I did not realize that. > Additionally countries that are part of the 5 eyes, 9 eyes or 15 eyes, see picture at the top of the article, are out, too. That makes a lot more sense for excluding countries. They still made a bit of a leap with saying all of the EU is bad, we're more than 15 countries, but let's presume the 'eyes' countries cover the remaining TLDs that had this local court thing and that explains the author's selection. That is, if local court is the only standard you want to go by. Another thing the article leaves as an exercise for the reader is whether any of those arbitration places have favorable rules compared to even the courts of Iceland for all I know.
- donmcronald 5y agoThat paper is a good read. It’s really disappointing that ICANN allowed the ngTLDs to engage in back room deals with the media and pharmaceutical industries. I think there was an effort to bring the ogTLD agreements inline with the ngTLD agreements, so I wonder if they’ve set it up so the ogTLDs can start doing the same. ogTLD and ngTLD aren’t real names afaik. I use them for the original gTLDs and the new gTLDs.
- tingletech 5y agoah, I was reading them as original gangster TLD and next generation TLD