The proposal is being spun as granting the US and other governments the ability to ban potentially “objectionable” domain names, and seem keen on scoring political points by moving against the likes of .gay and .xxx TLD proposals.
It would also, however, give every government the ability to block those it considers politically objectionable, and would present major problems for new nations that haven’t achieved universal recognition in obtaining TLDs of their own.
One can only imagine the ramifications when fledgling nations like Kosovo, which has designs on the .ks TLD, face unilateral bans by Serbia, or when South Ossetia and Abkhazia are blocked by Georgia. One can imagine similar difficulties would have arisen historically if these provisions had been in place when, for instance, Israel and the Palestinian territories were granted TLDs.
Exactly what power does this ‘constitutional law professor’ believe the president does not have?
Apparently Harvard Law ain’t what it used to be….
As if we haven't enough problems to take care of our overlords think THIS is important.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. "
Sorry, I thought I was in America again. This is Bizarro World. I forgot.
One could always split the DNS system… then there would be a DNS system of objectionable names and a DNS system of "agreeable ones". Configure your browser to use the objectionable DNS and voilà "my.porn" is suddenly meaningful.
Well I am telling you in advanced that .gay and .xxx will be banned in UAE.. They block all kind of bad stuff. Its just my opinion to not launch those TLDS because those are not good for any Country.
Thanks