Re: Feds after Google data

[Jim Murray <jim () digitaldaemons co uk>]

Fergie wrote:
> Yes, it has been proposed many, many times. Most recently: .kids
>
> Just google for 'tld kids' or look for '.kids'
>
> Regarding said domain, what makes you think that some unscrupulous
> people won't conduct nefarious activities in that TLD? Or conversely,
> what makes someone think that all pr0n would move to .xxx?
>
> The answer: there is no assurance -- there is no Internet police.
>
> To think so is an exercise is fantasy. ;-)

Perhaps, but that is one arena where the registries can exercise
effective control. It shouldn't be too difficult for the landsharks to
write a suitable prohibition clause into the registrar's agreement
forcing them to terminate reported domains with content which went
against the .tld's charter within a specified timescale.

Were such a charter drafted correctly I can see a significant number of
companies being more than willing to host services there given the
assurance that it would be a (relatively) safe place for services
targeted at children.

There's no way to guarantee .kids would be pr0n free but it would make
it financially unattractive to host pr0n there, especially given that
there are many, many other .tld's without such restrictions from which
to choose.

I can't actually understand why .kids failed to be honest, but then
again, much of ICANN's workings is a mystery to the human mind!

Jim.

-- 
      DigitalDaemons IT Services.
---------------------------------------
   E-Mail : jim () digitaldaemons co uk
  Web : http://www.digitaldaemons.net


_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.