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?
Filed Under: dns system, icann, openness, tld, top level domain, wikileaks
Companies: icann, wikileaks
Comments on “What Would Happen If Wikileaks Got Its Own Top Level Domain?”
Answer...
“What Would Happen If Wikileaks Got Its Own Top Level Domain?”
Then Joe Lieberman would shit himself. Period.
Re: Answer...
shit himself and have a period! wow
Re: Answer...
Joe Lieberman would either “fix” the internet or “un-invent” it.
Re: Re: Answer...
“un-invent” it? Will Al Gore put up with that shit?
Re: Answer...
I’m not sure he is smart enough to know what having their own tld means, but we could always hope…
Re: Answer...
No worries, I’m pretty sure he’s in the Depends demographic anyway.
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.
Re: 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.
Re: Re: Re:
I do, and set them up everywhere I go. Super easy to remember:
8.8.8.8
8.8.4.4
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
Re: Re:
but .open seems perfectly acceptable…..
Re: Re: Re:
.corruptioniscounterproductive
Re: Re:
…or a takeoff on the founder’s name: http://www.wikileaks.a**
Re: Re: Re:
Is .fu already taken?
Re: 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.
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.
The politics will find a way to sneak into any setup…
“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.
A Pirate Party one maybe.
Couldn’t it be something like a hybrid between SETI and anon/onion/stealthnet thingies?
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!
I like this better
How about this for a TLD: wikileaks.liebermanisabutthead
Isn't that counter productive
Wouldn’t that make them easier to block?
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.
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.
There should be a .wiki TLD. That would be awesome.