Honest question: what is the ultimate end game if at some point a court in another country orders a domain be reinstated? Do we end up with a domain registration system per country?

▲

inigyou a day ago | parent | next [-]

The winner of that battle will be wherever the DNS is hosted. Which is the USA. Even several ccTLDs are hosted in the USA and must obey USA law above the law of that country.

▲

dlenski a day ago | parent [-]

Which ones?

	▲	inigyou 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		IIRC .tv and .to are two famous ones. .me recently removed something or other because it turned out to be owned by US investors. And there are more, I just don't know the efficient way to go looking.

▲

walrus01 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think given the history and "ownership" of the specific TLD of .com by verisign and verisign's relationship with the US federal government, it then proceeds to ignore any court orders to reinstate the ownership issued by a court in any other country that is not the USA.

	▲	fc417fc802 a day ago \| parent [-]
		Presumably that would depend entirely on the extent to which verisign has any business dealings in the country in question. The more assets that could be seized or customers lost the more likely they are to comply.

▲

belorn 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The ultimate end game if too many countries would pull at the unified single root that is the domain name system and ip address space, would be a split root. Different countries would resolve .com to different places, and packages going to one server will be going to an other, and people on one side will not be able to communicate with people on the other side since packages would no longer be globally routeable.

In concept, IANA and the group of global stakeholders could move the whole thing to a different country if US becomes too much trouble.

▲

inigyou a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We literally already have one of those. Each country has a .XX TLD, and all other TLDs are for the USA.

▲

belorn 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

ICANN policy is very different for country code TLD and generic TLD. Every country (with minor exceptions) decide over their own TLD and thus decide whatever rules they want. It is explicitly a hands off approach in their management of the TLD's.

Generic TLD are different. ICANN dictate to different degree each generic TLD, and is also the one that give accreditation to registrars. ICANN has given different companies the role of operating and handling databases and registration systems, like Verisign with .com, but it is still ICANN that dictate policy. ICANN could decide tomorrow that Verisign is no longer suitable to run the operation of generic TLD's and thus move it to a company located in a different country.

Moving the operations of generic domains to a less US-centric location is not a new idea, same with the legal locations of the organizations that are ICANN and IANA. As I understand it, they are mostly located in USA as a matter of history.

▲

fragmede 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Even .horse?

▲

walrus01 19 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Take a look at the list of new generic TLDs that are run by Donuts LLC now Identity Digital, a US based company.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_Digital

	▲	card_zero 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		But that list does not include .horse, which is on another list as operated by Minds + Machines, "a British Virgin Islands-based company". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English-language_gener... I suppose they're in California really, but perhaps not for legal purposes. Likewise Uniregistry (.lol) "was registered in the Cayman Islands", for what good that does.

▲

inigyou 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, .horse is a USA TLD. It works this way because we let the USA have the exorbitant privilege of controlling the DNS root, and they realized they could make up new TLDs for money.

▲

a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]