Sign in / up

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 …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    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
  2. Anonymous Dutch Coward
    Mushroom

    NATO = UN Agency?!

    Stopped reading after that.

    4 1
    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: NATO = UN Agency?!

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

      0 0
  3. frank ly

    Don't forget UNIT and WHO

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

    3 0
  4. Graham Marsden
    Trollface

    What does...

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

    3 0
  5. Destroy All Monsters 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
    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      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
      1. Crazy Operations Guy
        Reply Icon

        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
  6. Vociferous

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

    Well, at least definitely Taking It Too Seriously.

    2 0
  7. Colin Millar

    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
  8. A Non e-mouse 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
    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Shoot the lawyers

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

      1 0
  9. Ken Hagan 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
    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      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
      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge
        Reply Icon

        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.