Re: [ICANN-EU] IPv6, was: re-chartering this list: draft.

[Christoph <cweber@dialup.nacamar.de>]

Hi,

Andy Mueller-Maguhn wrote:
> Form follows function; but the function of communication
> is to enable exchange of views. I wish we could agree, that
> any debate we have here must make sense itself and not
> be a tool for "I am better than you am cause I know more"
> games.

Agreed.

> >The problems we face now with the DNS system are nearly 100% 
> >externally caused (mostly by a mix of bad court decisions 
> >and legal theories and bad administrative practice), and 
> >we can create new TLDs until we are blue in the face, these
> >problems won't go away.
>
> Objection. I agree about the reasons for the current problems,
> but not, that new TLDīs couldnīt solve any problems. I could
> imagine that new TLDīs take place under there own rules,
> policies and legal theories. So, next to the (not so new) idea
> of a TLD ".TM" for the trademark-owners, 

But that is exactly the point: the current fashionable legal
theories decree that trademark laws apply to _every_ domain
in existance. So .TM (let's ignore the turkmenistan issue for 
now) would not solve anything. Even TLDs like .priv or .nom
would get immediately under the reign of trademark courts and
the IP industry. 

As long as we don't get the courts recognizing the differences 
between domains and trademarks, there will be no solution to that.

The usual way to convince courts is to change laws. Politics.
Now here the TM lobby comes into play - in our times laws are 
as much bought as voted-vor (if not even more so). 

And one of the paths of political influence of the TM lobby
is WIPO. But, instead of them beeing faced as an opponent
organizations of ICANN, WIPO is deeply involved in ICANN itself.

Which gets us to: to start solving a number of the problems
of DNS we have to get WIPO out of ICANN.

No _that's_ a worthy opponent :-)

>i could imagine ".GPL" for everything under gnu public-license. 

- daimler-benz.gnu would immediately get sued
- ICANN has made very clear that nonprofits like that will not be
  accepted; as evidenced by the US $50.000 appliance fee.

> We could even
> expand these to cultural and religious spaces, like ".ISLAM"
> (btw, they have no copyright & patent-laws ;), ".catholic"
> for everything under Catholic policy and so on.

Oh my God. 

What did you smoke (and can I get some of that ? :-)
Does soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya ring any bell ? 

Hint: this group does not exist. That is the result of one of the 
most bitter and hostile flamewars in Usenet history; Unfortunately
islamic 'religious tolerance' does not extend to anything they 
consider heretic. So the islamic netizens prevented by any means
an ahmadi newsgroup under .islam, while the ahmadi folks insisted 
they considered themselves islamic and could therefore not be
categorized outside of .islam.

This is a very real conflict. People get killed or put in jail
for a long time in these countries for stuff like that.

If there ever was a can of worms, .islam is it.
(A .catholic TLD is a bad idea as well, for other reasons,
though not _that_ bad)
 
> Planet earth is big and I donīt see any reason for putting
> american policies and/or centralised ICANN decisions on the
> whole cultural and economic space internet.

Sorry. WIPO is as big as earth is. WIPO influence is worldwide.

> So, for it might be quiete difficult, to break up the rules
> on the current TLD`s, it might be a good way to create some
> new ones under those policies and so show up alternatives.

I is useless changing these technical rules without changing 
the political realities.
 
Regards

Christoph Weber-Fahr