South American nations open fire on ICANN for 'illegal' sale of .amazon

Re:South American nations open fire on ICANN for 'illegal' s... by cambalache on Sunday January 26, 2020 @09:49AM (#22152302)

Well given the fact that Guyana is an English speaking country and a member of ACTO, it has as much right as US has over a hypothetical New York or California domain. Or it does not count because it is "South-American" and not proper English to you?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:South American nations open fire on ICANN for 'illegal' s... by zamadatix on Sunday January 26, 2020 @10:22AM (#22152443)

I think the choice of New York/California really muddies up this comparison. Maybe a Guyanese company named Rocky Mountain getting ".rockymountain" would be more apt. Otherwise you start to bring in comparison to geographic boundaries over many countries vs political boundaries which have historically been reserved in DNS as well as protection of existing domains when registering a new one which (I don't believe) is the case here as well as government vs other domains and possibly more "as well"s I'm not thinking of.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:South American nations open fire on ICANN for 'illegal' s... by cambalache on Sunday January 26, 2020 @11:35AM (#22152921)

Why does it muddies it up?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:South American nations open fire on ICANN for 'illegal' s... by zamadatix on Sunday January 26, 2020 @08:34PM (#22156190)

For the reasons I listed in my comment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:South American nations open fire on ICANN for 'illegal' s... by perl4ever on Sunday January 26, 2020 @05:16PM (#22155177)

Baja California is in what country?

Also, most of the outrage I'm aware of over the commercial use of California by non-Americans is because some people name things "California" and then don't sell them in the US.

https://www.adventure-journal.com/2019/08/its-absurd-the-new...

[ Parent | on HN ]