What Would Happen If Wikileaks Got Its Own Top Level Domain?

from the a-freedom-tld? dept

With all the talk about how the whole Wikileaks/domain name seizures issue is about a centralized vs. decentralized internet and even talk of a more decentralized DNS system, IP Watch raises an interesting question. With ICANN's plans to allow just about any TLD, what would happen if Wikileaks were to apply for its very own TLD?

Given ICANN's official statement that it does not take down domain names and has no technical or legal authority to participate in such forms of censorship (and, in fact, we've noted in the past that ICANN has refused to meet with IP Czar Victoria Espinel about this, noting that it would not be appropriate), would it allow such a TLD to be created, and then take a hands off approach?

What if it wasn't even a .wikileaks (or just .leaks) TLD, but a more general .open DNS, managed by an organization that agreed not to censor anything, no matter what the cause?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 2:57pm

    Answer...

    "What Would Happen If Wikileaks Got Its Own Top Level Domain?"

    Then Joe Lieberman would shit himself. Period.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:03pm

    Re: Answer...

    shit himself and have a period! wow

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    EC, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:06pm

    Governments would probably pressure ISPs (who control the vast majority of DNS servers used by the public) to not forward look ups to the root server in question... If the TLD is not accessible by default for most people, it becomes useless.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:12pm

    An application for a top level domain requires that a served community is identified, and that there is proof that the community is not properly served in existing ways.

    .leaks is about as likely as .pedophile or .mafia

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Steve Gaucher, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:14pm

    Re:

    But I can then just use Google's DNS servers (I already do anyway... 8.8.8.8!), or anyone's. Maybe this same organization can start up their own DNS server.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Designerfx (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:15pm

    its already happening

    it's called decentralized.wikileaks.

    whether it happens via peer to peer dns or another method, it's basically going to happen.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    Whatis42? (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:16pm

    Re:

    but .open seems perfectly acceptable.....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:19pm

    Re:

    ...or a takeoff on the founder's name: www.wikileaks.a**

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:33pm

    Re: Re:

    .corruptioniscounterproductive

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Vic, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:41pm

    The politics will find a way to sneak into any setup...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    greg.fenton (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:41pm

    Re: Answer...

    Joe Lieberman would either "fix" the internet or "un-invent" it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 3:55pm

    Re: Re: Answer...

    "un-invent" it? Will Al Gore put up with that shit?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 4:00pm

    "What Would Happen If Wikileaks Got Its Own Top Level Domain?"
    Nothing more significant than if it doesn't. wikileaks for all intents and purposes is an idea more than a website.

    The idea is that information will find a way out there, and this is the very beginning of how it all starts.

    An example: Wikileaks doesn't contain credit card numbers or SSN's, that will be amongst the next steps, and it won't even be released by criminal gangs, it'll be released with concerned Sysadmins that want better ways to conduct financial transactions and maintain identity. 16/9-digit unencrypted codes is not a secure method of maintaining identity/financial identity. Eventually, an entire current list of United States Social Security numbers will be released publicly, throwing commerce a fairly big jolt. The number will be fairly useless, as fraud becomes trivial in the archaic way we use this number.

    We can either prepare for it now and change to a different method, or watch as our economy slowly crumbles based on legacy ideas that this information will stay forever secure and locked up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 4:02pm

    Re: Re:

    Is .fu already taken?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    cc (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 4:35pm

    A Pirate Party one maybe.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    beckerist (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 4:44pm

    Re: Re:

    I do, and set them up everywhere I go. Super easy to remember:
    8.8.8.8
    8.8.4.4

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    Nicolasp (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 4:59pm

    Couldn't it be something like a hybrid between SETI and anon/onion/stealthnet thingies?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    mrtraver (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 5:13pm

    Re: Answer...

    I'm not sure he is smart enough to know what having their own tld means, but we could always hope...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    shutslar (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 5:46pm

    managed by an organization that agreed not to censor anything

    But you HAVE to think of the children! If we don't censor sensitive government and other documents all our children could be irreparably harmed in some unknown manner. OMG! Just think of all the damage that could be done if the children actually seen and read uncensored documents!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2010 @ 6:37pm

    I like this better

    How about this for a TLD: wikileaks.liebermanisabutthead

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    icon
    The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Dec 9th, 2010 @ 9:11pm

    Re: Answer...

    No worries, I'm pretty sure he's in the Depends demographic anyway.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Brian Sullivan, Dec 10th, 2010 @ 6:31am

    Isn't that counter productive

    Wouldn't that make them easier to block?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 10th, 2010 @ 6:44am

    Our government is supposed to protect us against such abuses as the domain name seizures and censorship. I though our rights would be restored under Obama, but I have never seen a more spineless do nothing president since Carter. It gets worse and worse as they treat all of us more and more like criminals with no rights. We are becoming prisoners in our own country.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 10th, 2010 @ 6:54am

    There should be a .wiki TLD. That would be awesome.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Dec 10th, 2010 @ 7:15am

    Re:

    An application for a top level domain requires that a served community is identified, and that there is proof that the community is not properly served in existing ways.

    The existence of the .biz domain suggests otherwise.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Dec 10th, 2010 @ 7:20am

    Re: Isn't that counter productive

    I don't think it would be any easier technically to block "*.open" than "wikileaks.com", and perhaps politically a little more difficult, especially if there are a variety of sites using the domain and not just wikileaks. Easier to campaign against one "evil" organization than against a whole group whose common purpose is openness.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This