3 ms·

Sure but don't pay your property tax and let me know what happens there.

trompetenaccoun 4y ago
Yes, that's a good analogy, it's pretty much the exact same situation, with the only difference that the government collects tax while DNS is in the hands of private corporations. Imo there is a good argument for property tax if you view land as a somewhat public good. After all some wealthy family can and in some cases in the old world literally does own vast stretches of land for centuries. That's basically hereditary aristocracy, probably not the best political system we could come up with. So imposing a tax/rent on land ownership seems reasonable to me. Anyway, I may be digressing because the point wasn't even if it's good or bad, just that it isn't ownership in the way people generally understand the term. With DNS I find it personally questionable why it's in private hands if we as a society have decided to impose a tax/rent. It used to be public afaik, it's a bit like privatizing the water supply. I think most people would be against it if they know how the internet works. They simply never noticed it even happened.
- nix23 4y ago
  >DNS is in the hands of private corporations https://www.icann.org/ https://www.icann.org/ ??
necovek 4y ago
Government will sue you and if courts find you owing money to the government and you fail to pay up, some of your property will be seized and sold off to cover the due tax and legal fees. That "some" might not be the property you failed to pay the tax on (eg it could be your car whereas you failed to pay property taxes on your house). There are usually protections on the property you inhabit, but otherwise they should look to seize whatever is smallest but big enough to cover the amount due. With domains, you lose the domain that you failed to pay fees on, and no other property will be seized to pay it off. The difference is in requiring a court system and in what way you are liable (any of your holdings can cover it).

Yes, that's a good analogy, it's pretty much the exact same situation, with the only difference that the government collects tax while DNS is in the hands of private corporations. Imo there is a good argument for property tax if you view land as a somewhat public good. After all some wealthy family can and in some cases in the old world literally does own vast stretches of land for centuries. That's basically hereditary aristocracy, probably not the best political system we could come up with. So imposing a tax/rent on land ownership seems reasonable to me. Anyway, I may be digressing because the point wasn't even if it's good or bad, just that it isn't ownership in the way people generally understand the term. With DNS I find it personally questionable why it's in private hands if we as a society have decided to impose a tax/rent. It used to be public afaik, it's a bit like privatizing the water supply. I think most people would be against it if they know how the internet works. They simply never noticed it even happened.

nix23 4y ago
>DNS is in the hands of private corporations https://www.icann.org/ https://www.icann.org/ ??

necovek 4y ago

Government will sue you and if courts find you owing money to the government and you fail to pay up, some of your property will be seized and sold off to cover the due tax and legal fees. That "some" might not be the property you failed to pay the tax on (eg it could be your car whereas you failed to pay property taxes on your house). There are usually protections on the property you inhabit, but otherwise they should look to seize whatever is smallest but big enough to cover the amount due. With domains, you lose the domain that you failed to pay fees on, and no other property will be seized to pay it off. The difference is in requiring a court system and in what way you are liable (any of your holdings can cover it).