Letting Pocock keep the domain is not a fact. It is a choice. The choice is based on law, and the rendering of the judgement was based on facts, but it is ultim

Letting Pocock keep the domain is not a fact. It is a choice. The choice is based on law, and the rendering of the judgement was based on facts, but it is ultimately turning out this way because some people once upon a time decided that domain names should: * be first-come first serve * be rented for an ongoing, nominal subscription * to the maximum extent allowed by law Giving up any one of these properties, and the Internet would be a totally different place. And none of these are fundamental human rights, or necessary for free speech. They’re just designed to work this way because someone thought it was the best way to avoid various stupid, useless outcomes, like domain names being permanently lost because the owner dies, or some teenagers squatting all the domain names because they think it’s funny, or having an important organization get hijacked because someone manages to fill out a form before the group that really can lay a legitimate claim to that name does it. None of these are facts. They’re values. You cannot factually prove these things. The only thing you might be able to prove is that, out of all the things we might want from a namespace system, you have to make trade-offs.