[LINK] Fwd: ICANN Alert
Sun, 15 Oct 2000 22:37:11 +1000
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 20:32:46 +1000, Adam Todd quoted:
>>Sound benign? Except that ICANN has operated
>>secretly, with its very existence a secret to most
>>Internet users. The reason is simple: It is not being
>>covered by the media.
>>Read the rest at:
I take the opportunity to add the following which came in unsolicited
mail from an organisation seemingly called cybernet..
> Oct 3, 2000 - Marina del Rey, California - ICANN announces that the
> application process has been completed. The new domain extensions
> will be awarded to registries in December 2000.
> The proposed new domains include: .web, .inc, .kids, .shop, .store,
> .firm, .law, .biz, .nom, .news, .site .xxx, .tel, .sex and more.
> The approved TLDs are scheduled to be made available starting early 2001.
> ICAAN however has not released the exact time and date.
> In anticipation of high demand, you can pre-register for these
> names prior to their official public opening via a centralized
> pre-registration database. For further information about the
> pre-registration process please visit:
I notice from that site that ".porn" appears to be a possible option,
although it doesn't appear on the registration page.
On a similar note nearly every Internet newsgroup is being flooded at
the moment with warnings about the AOL Time-Warner merger.
Here is one concern being expressed in this lobbying. I'm unable to
comment on the truth of this but simply quote that which I've read
several hundred times in newsgroups across Usenet....
>These are the things that Colette Lantelme, Security Administrator
>of Road Runner, claims are against the Road Runner Acceptable Use
>1. Posting a message on any "For Sale" message board.
>2. Listing a product on any Ebay, Ubid, or similar service. (Boy, is
> EBAY gonna be PISSED!)
>3. Announcing a job availability.
>4. Replying to a job availability.
>5. Mentioning that the user had tried any product and found
> it satisfactory - or unsatisfactory.
>6. Posting a message to any "personals" board.
>7. Asking a user for a date.
>8. Calling attention to any commercial or non-commercial
> website, including personal websites provided as part
> of the purchase price of the service sold by Time-Warner.
>9. Calling attention to any IRC chat channel.
We have recently seen the demise of Internet "icons" such as Remarq and
talk of censorship on chat services.
There is I believe some cause for concern. The liberty we enjoy to
widely express our opinions or beliefs without them being vetted "prior
to publication" is possibly under threat. If we reach the stage where
we can't point to IRC channels, or discuss products we may have
purchased, then there would be cause for concern.
Some of this is driven by technology, some of it by money and
commercial interests, some of it by a variety of factors few of us can
I personally would hate to see the Internet become a "closed shop with
walls" which is the way it could well be heading.....
Bob Bain. Sydney Australia