I think there would be lots of backlash against any new DNS alternatives (i.e. not controlled by central authorities like the ones that allowed[1] all the trade

I think there would be lots of backlash against any new DNS alternatives (i.e. not controlled by central authorities like the ones that allowed[1] all the trademark disputes of the last 15+ years... of which McDonalds was one of the earliest and most well-known). I think consumers would have no opinion as they do not understand DNS or the history behind it. But I think geeks and nerds would attack any new service that improved on the old one we've stuck to through 15 years of needless antagonistic registration behaviour. Do you agree? What do you think? 1. With proper knowledge of both the legal and technical issues, it is theoretically possible to implement a system that prevents these disputes before they occur. I have a project that aims to do this. Maybe it would be important for any new DNS service to be honoured by geeks and nerds, not criticicised (except on technical merits), such that non-technical consumers, who might look for guidance to what geeks and nerds (e.g. blogs) say on these matters, would not be led to believe alternative DNS services were some sort of faux-innovation. IMO, DNS needs more principled people involved. A lot of monkey business (i.e. unneeded trademark disputes, namespace hoarding, etc.) has occurred over the DNS's history because few technically capable people were aware of the problems and/or willing to break from the status quo (and the dirty money) to fix them.