Saudi Arabia objects to some new gTLDs

[Tamir Israel]

Not to add to your cynicism, but apparently religion ('.church'),
children ('.kids') or anything negative ('.sucks') are also potentially
sensitive (and hence not allowed online either?), say the house/senate
judiciary committees:

http://www.leahy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/8-7-12%20Letter%20from%20Senate%20and%20House%20Judiciary%20Committees.pdf

Also some shots there at the Trademark clearinghouse notification
process....

(sorry if this is a repost....)

Best,
Tamir

On 8/15/2012 5:18 PM, Andrei Barburas wrote:
> If I learned something by being a techie, is to expect the unexpected;
> literally from anyone.
>
> From the reasons behind their objections, for me it seems like
> currently, online, there is no sex or gambling or anything at all
> related to babies online.
>
> I might be overreacting or exaggerating a bit, but I do not see the
> rationale behind some of their objections.
>
>
>
> *Andrei Barburas*
>
> Community Relations Services Officer
>
> International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)
>
> P.O. Box 11586, 2502 AN The Hague, The Netherlands
>
>
> Mobile: +31 62 928 2879
>
> Phone: +31 70 311 7311
> Fax: +31 70 311 7322
> Website: www.iicd.org <http://www.iicd.org/>
>
> **People ********ICT   Development**
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>
>     > On the other hand, it seems like the potential of the new gTLDs
>     is still a bit misunderstood, simply because some "techies"
>     believe that ICANN is creating new "Internets".
>
>     I would be shocked if there was a single Internet technical person
>     on the planet who thought that the creation of new gTLDs was the
>     creation of new Internets
>
>     avri
>
>
>     On 15 Aug 2012, at 21:50, Andrei Barburas wrote:
>
>     > While the situation indeed is a bit "sad", I don't think it's
>     unmanageable.
>     >
>     > What can also be mentioned is that the potential registrars of
>     these gTLDs are respectable organizations (.baby, .virgin, etc).
>     >
>     > On the other hand, it seems like the potential of the new gTLDs
>     is still a bit misunderstood, simply because some "techies"
>     believe that ICANN is creating new "Internets".
>     >
>     > Just because there will be no gTLD like for example, .buddha,
>     that doesn't mean that people will not be able to find information
>     about Buddha. The same applies to gambling, sex, poker, tattoos
>     and pretty much all the "moral grounds" the KSA based its objections.
>     >
>     > Cheers,
>     >
>     >
>     > Andrei Barburas
>     > Community Relations Services Officer
>     >
>     > International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)
>     > P.O. Box 11586, 2502 AN The Hague, The Netherlands
>     >
>     > Mobile: +31 62 928 2879 <tel:%2B31%2062%20928%202879>
>     > Phone: +31 70 311 7311 <tel:%2B31%2070%20311%207311>
>     > Fax: +31 70 311 7322 <tel:%2B31%2070%20311%207322>
>     > Website: www.iicd.org <http://www.iicd.org>
>     >
>     > People   ICT   Development
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Milton L Mueller
>     <mueller at syr.edu <mailto:mueller at syr.edu>> wrote:
>     > This link doesn't get you directly to the article. I had to
>     search for "ICANN" within the site
>     > Maybe this link will work:
>     http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/08/14/icann.receives.registration.complaints.on.moral.health.grounds/#ixzz23drBbmjd
>     >
>     > Once you get there, it is a good example of how GAC facilitates
>     a censorship mentality. The Saudis should be publicly ridiculed
>     for their absurd and restrictive ideas; they seem to think that
>     because they have dirty minds they have the right to impute their
>     own wild associations to the rest of us. For example, they
>     objected to Johnson & Johnson's .baby because "there is a risk
>     that this string is used in the same way as .XXX to host
>     pornographic websites."
>     >
>     > Yes, and there is a risk that KSA might be used by someone as an
>     acronym for Kiss my Ass. So Maybe the name of the Kingdom of Saudi
>     Arabia should be banned...
>     >
>     > > -----Original Message-----
>     > > From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>] On Behalf
>     > > Of Horacio T. Cadiz
>     > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 12:39 AM
>     > > To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>     > > Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Saudi Arabia objects to some new gTLDs
>     > >
>     > >    We've been discussing new gTLDs and HR. Milton objected to the
>     > > statement:  "Consideration of applications for new TLDs should be
>     > > mindful of sensitivities."
>     > >
>     > >    KSA objects to .virgin, .baby, and others
>     > >
>     > >
>     http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/0/14/icann.receives.registration.co
>     > > mplaints.on.moral.health.grounds/
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >     The sensitivities of the KSA have been aroused.
>     > >
>     > > --
>     > > Bombim Cadiz
>     > > *****************************************
>     > > *  Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) --  *
>     > > * No windows. No gates. It is open.     *
>     > > * No Bill. It is Free.                  *
>     > > *****************************************
>     >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20120815/d3d87fda/attachment-0001.html>