[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bwg+] Re: [wg-b] Revised IPC Proposal

And while were at it, let us remember that many character strings which are
meaningless in the U.S, offend the cultural sensibilities of residents in
other countries.

Let every country submit a list of infamous terms that are widely
recognized as offensive, with an additional twenty (20) variations of such
words. At the end of the ninety (90) days notice period, a thirty (30) day
Sunrise Period shall begin, at which time a country that has compiled its
list of infamous words may apply for permanent exclusion of such words
provided that the words have appeared in a dictionary published for public
dissemination at least one year prior to the to the date on which the
domain name registrant applies to register the word, along with
applications for registration for up to an additional twenty (20)
variations of such infamous words.


>----- Original Message -----
>From: John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. <john@johnberryhill.com>
>To: Hartman, Steve <HartmanS@nabisco.com>; <wg-b@dnso.org>
>> > The
>> > IPC proposal does not affect the use of words on a website.(And in other
>> > countries, Great Britain comes immediately to mind, prior restraint of
>> > written word is not uncommon.)
>> > Steve Hartman
>Then let's open up the sunrise period to religious groups who have a
>profound interest in the non-use of certain strings of letters.
>Why should the Internet protect trademark holders, and yet offend orthodox
>Jews who consider a certain four-letter combination, the tetragrammaton, to
>be sacred.
>You guys only worry about litigation.  Why, if a registrar allows a
>disrespectful name to incorporate that of the Prophet, peace be upon him,
>well.... would you rather face down a lawsuit or a Jihad?  Clearly the
>registrars need protection from that kind of thing.  Look what happened to
>Salman Rushdie.
>Also, we will need to protect the interests of minority groups against hate
>speech, much in the same way that killniggers.com is indicated to be
>registered for non-use in the whois data for it.  Why is the cause of
>trademark holders more worthy of sunrise protection than the cause of human
>rights?  Oh, yeah, I forgot "killniggers.com" is not speech.... Do you
>believe that?
>I don't.

Ellen Rony                    //          http://www.domainhandbook.com
Co-author                  *="  ____ /            erony@marin.k12.ca.us
The Domain Name Handbook      \     )                  +1  415.435.5010
                              //   \\             "Carpe canine"

          The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.