In message <20010309064952.B10940@eiv.com>, Shawn McMahon writes:
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 05:27:20PM -0800, Tony Hain wrote:
More precisely, the courts started getting involved as soon as first-come-first-serve stopped working fine.
No, someone involved the courts when they were second, and the courts didn't understand so they didn't smack it back at the lawyers "dismissed with prejudice".
DNS didn't make the mess, the courts did.
In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major problem with first-come, first-served *productive* use of a domain name, but frankly, that's not where the problem has been. The problem has been speculators and cybersquatters. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 09:10:09AM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin mailed:
In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major problem with first-come, first-served *productive* use of a domain name, but frankly, that's not where the problem has been. The problem has been speculators and cybersquatters.
Uh, why couldn't the town just use <name>.nj.us or whatever the city specific code was long ago and far way. -- Bryan C. Andregg Smoke Jumper "As Slow as Possible, <bandregg@redhat.com> Red Hat, Inc. As Fast as Necessary." gpg 1024D/19893A19 A8DA 869A 037A C6B5 BF07 AB61 E406 414B 1989 3A19
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 10:02:28AM -0500, Bryan C. Andregg wrote:
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 09:10:09AM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin mailed:
In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major problem with first-come, first-served *productive* use of a domain name, but frankly, that's not where the problem has been. The problem has been speculators and cybersquatters.
Uh, why couldn't the town just use <name>.nj.us or whatever the city specific code was long ago and far way.
Because some company in Norwalk, CT holds www.<city-name>.nj.us for most of the cities in New Jersey since 1997.
-- Bryan C. Andregg Smoke Jumper "As Slow as Possible, <bandregg@redhat.com> Red Hat, Inc. As Fast as Necessary."
gpg 1024D/19893A19 A8DA 869A 037A C6B5 BF07 AB61 E406 414B 1989 3A19
-- Omachonu Ogali missnglnk@informationwave.net http://www.informationwave.net
In message <20010309064952.B10940@eiv.com>, Shawn McMahon writes:
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 05:27:20PM -0800, Tony Hain wrote:
More precisely, the courts started getting involved as soon as first-come-first-serve stopped working fine.
No, someone involved the courts when they were second, and the courts didn't understand so they didn't smack it back at the lawyers "dismissed with prejudice".
DNS didn't make the mess, the courts did.
In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major problem with first-come, first-served *productive* use of a domain name, but frankly, that's not where the problem has been. The problem has been speculators and cybersquatters.
And how would you define "productive" use? ALex
On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major problem with first-come, first-served *productive* use of a domain name, but frankly, that's not where the problem has been. The problem has been speculators and cybersquatters.
Steven: I'm not sure why one would assume that the {city}.com domain should go to the city or why the city would be forced to deal with the people who've registered that domain. It would seem that {city}.org, or even more appropriately the regional domains would be the better choice. In my experience, the {city}.com domains are used more, and appropriately so, by commercial enterprises like companies with that name, realestate agencies, visitor's bureau's, etc. I agree it's unfortunate that the system permitted large scale registration of those domains (or any for that matter), but I think it's hard to draw the line between what was reasonable and wasn't in that regard. Certainly, however, there are extreme cases that are obvious. We have an interesting case of our own in that we registered a specific {city}.com domain rather a long time ago, for some time were providing content related to businesses in that city using that domain, and more reciently have been loaning the domain to the local chamber to use (without compensation I might add in addition to use of an on-line business database, also without compensation). In receint discussions with the chamber we got the distinct impression that they considered that domain to be "theirs" and that they essentially intended to walk with it. I'm not sure our suggestions for them to move to a regional domain are being well received. I guess we'll see where that goes, but it's interesting how they view this matter in a similar vein to what you suggest. Chuck
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 09:10:09AM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major
Bull. Where is it written that towns MUST have a .com address? Those towns had .townname.nj.us available to them for FREE. They chose to use .com, they chose to have the problem. It's about choices.
participants (6)
-
alex＠yuriev.com -
Bryan C. Andregg -
Charles Scott -
Omachonu Ogali -
Shawn McMahon -
Steven M. Bellovin