Feeds

back to article Nato, UN, NGOs slug it out with namespace biz bods: IMHO... STFU

A muddy battle over the protection of the acronyms of government bodies and NGOs in domain names has begun... in classic acronym-heavy style. The Internet Commerce Association (ICA) – the nearest thing the investor community has to a domain trade lobby group – is concerned that the likes of NATO and UN agencies such as Interpol …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge

WTF?

To quote:

Turkish: Yeah, that's perfectly clear, Mickey. Yeah... just give me one minute to confer with my colleague.

[to Tommy]

Turkish: Did you understand a single word of what he just said?

4
0
Bronze badge
Mushroom

NATO = UN Agency?!

Stopped reading after that.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: NATO = UN Agency?!

Of course. Did you think it was the US "protection" outfit of Yurop?

0
0
Silver badge

Don't forget UNIT and WHO

They have a long association. (I might be getting confused here).

3
0
Silver badge
Trollface

What does...

... the Institute of Contemporary Arts have to do with this...?

3
0
Silver badge
Headmaster

MUH PROTECTION!

Can anyone in the taxfeeding heaven tell me what this is about except people having too much time on their hands while their taxpayer-provided paycheck arrives unbidden in their mailbox?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: MUH PROTECTION!

The very corporate funded ICANN wants to invent lots of new domain names so you can be www.sony

Organisations like Nato point out that if people try and register .nato as a new business Nato will have to go around and drop a big pile of "peacekeeping" on them.

So wouldn't it be better if ICANN announce that you can't register .nato, .un, .red-cross etc

0
1
Bronze badge

Re: MUH PROTECTION!

ICANN already prevent you from registering .nato, .un, etc. What they want to prevent you from doing is registering second-level names that infringe on these names like red-cross.sony, UN.bank or nato.bollocks or whatever your chosen gTLD is.

1
0
Silver badge

T.I.T.S., or G.T.F.O.

Well, at least definitely Taking It Too Seriously.

2
0

Its quite simple

The internet conmen's commerce association wants to protect their rights to mislead customers and the Association of Big Brothers wants to control all of your informations.

1
0
Silver badge

Shoot the lawyers

The only people who are going to win out of all this are the lawyers. No-one else gives a stuff about it all.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Shoot the lawyers

Hopefully NATO will decide that airstrikes are cheaper than lawyers, more fun and less messy

1
0
Gold badge

NATO? Over-protected?

Does this mean someone wants to be able to register .nato as a gTLD but those interfering little busy-bodies have said no? The mind boggles. What were they going to host there?

Actually, this being humanity we're talking about, they were almost certainly going to host www.sex.nato, which might have been worth seeing just for the surrealism.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: NATO? Over-protected?

It might be a good idea if Nato registered .nato as a gTLD

At the moment they use nato.int which more than a few badly configured email systems refuse to recognise.

0
0
Gold badge

Re: NATO? Over-protected?

Sorry, but I have to disagree.

Why is it NATO's problem if some random twerp's email system can't cope with .int? Why should NATO blow all that money? And if this email system has gone to the effort of blocking .int (presumably by white-listing the few TLDs that it's idiot-ministrator had actually heard of) then why would it be more likely to recognise .nato?

1
0
This topic is closed for new posts.