

Consumer Groups Decry 'Dot-US' Policies 16
JThaddeus writes: "The Washington Post reports that
nonprofits are complaining about how NeuStar Inc. registered '.us' names on a first-come, first-served basis. 'While NeuStar did set aside some generic names, such as parks.us and kids.us, several nonprofit groups accused the company of making those decisions arbitrarily.' Some of these names have policy implications."
Implications of .us distribution (Score:3, Interesting)
No thanks, I'd rather have a non-obvious
Re:Implications of .us distribution (Score:2, Insightful)
Good grief!
Re:Implications of .us distribution (Score:1)
I'm peeved that the system favors companies or groups that already own {name}.com|.org|.net to get the first crack at every new domain name, thus nullifying the entire reason for releasing new TLDs in the first place.
Though I may have an over-inflated sense of importance sometimes, that does not enter into this specific equation. My concern is not that I think that I should have precedence, but rather that nobody should have precedence over anybody else.
I'm not into flag-waving or patriotism; I saw
It's not the policy so much as the approach (Score:3, Informative)
That is, until I found out that you had to "bid" for the names, paying a nonrefundable "bidding" fee up front, regardless of whether or not you "won" the "auction." I'm using the bid and auction terms loosely here, because even though that's how it was hyped to the public, it wasn't an auction at all. It was, as mentioned, more of a first-come, first-serve situation. Except in the case of generic names like business.us, there really wasn't any true bidding taking place.
What ticks me off is that NeuStar (and the registrars) conned everyone into believing that this was truly going to be an auction. The incessant spam I got from Dotster - who I've never used as a registrar, and never will thanks to their
If people had known ahead of time that it was first-come, first-serve, nobody would have put up the bidding fees. The whole thing was basically a big scam to get people to spend money that they didn't need to spend, since paying the bidding fee didn't give you any benefit.
Fuck NeuStar and fuck Dotster.
Re:It's not the policy so much as the approach (Score:2, Informative)
Of course, if you had actually read www.nic.us, you would have known all this.
Dept Commerce Slipped Up (Score:3, Insightful)
It's too easy to err on the side of laissez faire on an issue that impacts the broader public like this.
The Dept of Commerce should have set down a few more guidelines to head off some of the criticism.
I think letting first claimants have priority, letting holders of related names have priority and people who pay money have priority are fine things, but not the only things.
Having a probationary period where potential names are publicly posted before they become more permanent would be helpful.
A Neustar website saying, for example, that an application for xenu.us was made tCoS on such and such a date for the amount of so many dollars and does anyone have a public comment on it would be helpful.
Thereafter, forever hold thy peace.
Re:Dept Commerce Slipped Up (Score:2)
Re:Hmm.... (Score:1)