[IP] from a former icanner --more on ICANN's "ex-ex-ex" domains and the slippery slope
Begin forwarded message:
From: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: June 2, 2005 5:08:47 PM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] more on ICANN's "ex-ex-ex" domains and the slippery
slope
Reply-To: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, David Farber wrote:
I find ICANN's approval of .xxx to be, to put it bluntly, obscene.
ICANN has created a system in which top level domain allocations are
few and far between - ICANN has created an artificial (and
unwarranted) scarcity.
In light of this contrived scarcity, ICANN should be giving
preference to TLD uses that are socially positive. Instead ICANN has
created a system in which priority is given to those who wish to
profit from pornograpy.
Had ICANN created a system in which there was no artifical scarcity
then it would, in my view, be appropriate to allow the pimps to
establish a red-light district on the net, but *only* after those
those who have socially constructive ideas had had their chance to
obtain top level domains.
Way back in year 2000 ICANN accepted $2,400,000 from nearly 50
applicants, many of whom had socially constructive and innovative
ideas for new TLDs. ICANN chose a mere 7, most of which were among
the least useful and innovative of the 50. ICANN refused at least
one application simply because one of the board members had trouble
pronouncing the letters of the TLD! ICANN has since told the
remaining 40 applicants that their applications are still pending,
neither approved nor disapproved. In practical effect, given the
many years that have elapsed, ICANN has expropriated those
application fees and relegated the technically-still-pending
applications to the rubbish heap. Even Enron was not nearly so bold
as ICANN in they way they took money.
That year 2000 action by ICANN, coupled with ICANN's overt preference
for "sponsored" top level domains, particularly those from which
ICANN can extract large fees, has made it clear that those who want
establish innovative or socially beneficial, but financially thin,
top level domains need not waste their time and money making a futile
application.
Thus we have ICANN receiving applications only from those who have a
well oiled pathway towards approval - one only has to look at the
progress of the travel industry's .travel TLD to see how well
lubricated a path ICANN can create for an application virtually no
social value that comes from the right kind of applicant.
The net effect is that .xxx was the beneficiary of ICANN's policy of
artifical scarcity coupled to ICANN's policy of preferences for the
those applications from which ICANN can coerce revenue.
ICANN has gone so far off the rails that they can't even see the
tracks with a telescope.
--karl--
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/