Discuss mailing list

[kevin <krattai AT gmail.com>]

Actually Jonah, the document is _specifically_ .free TOS.

ARSI, which "owns" the .free TLD, therefore is asserting their rights to
said content.

That said, I'm not a lawyer.  So I would refer to EFF for that matter.
In the mean time, I wouldn't be so quick to think that Amazon is simply
asserting freedoms to those who register a domain on a TLD that they
own.  Given their track record.

Cheers,

Kevin

On Sun, 2016-12-04 at 03:18 +0000, Jonah Aragon wrote:
> Stop! Before we all start spreading rumors about .free terms... that
> copyright policy only applies to:
> 
> 
> Amazon Registry Services, Inc. (“ARSI”) provides information about
> ARSI’s Top Level Domains (“TLDs”) through websites of ARSI, including
> www.amazonregistry.com and the websites for each of the TLDs, which
> are located at http://www.nic.free and mobile applications
> (collectively, the “Sites”). 
> 
> 
> "Sites" (with a capital S) refers to their registry's websites.
> 
> 
> This policy does not apply to registered .free domains.
> 
> 
> Jonah 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 9:16 PM Zac <opennicproject AT dearzac.com> wrote:
> 
>         This seems like something the EFF would care about.
>         
>         
>         
>         On 2016-12-03 21:09, Jeff Taylor wrote:
>         
>         > Yikes, that's really bad.  Sounds exactly like facebook.
>         > 
>         > So how do you propose we fight against them?
>         > 
>         > 
>         > On 12/03/2016 08:05 PM, kevin wrote:
>         > 
>         > > wow!
>         > > 
>         > > OK, this is more than just a "good fight" on principle.
>         > > 
>         > > Has anyone read the Amazon .free TOS?
>         > > 
>         > > http://nic.free/pdf/FREE-en-ConditionsOfUse.pdf
>         > > 
>         > > "COPYRIGHT
>         > > All content included in or made available through any Site, 
> such as
>         > > text, graphics, logos, button icons, images, audio clips, 
> digital
>         > > downloads, data compilations, and software is the property of 
> ARSI or
>         > > its content suppliers and protected by United States and 
> international
>         > > copyright laws. The compilation of all content included in or 
> made
>         > > available through any Site is the exclusive property of ARSI and
>         > > protected by U.S. and international copyright laws"
>         > > 
>         > > I say we hold strong to .free
>         > > 
>         > > Kevin
>         > > 
>         > > On Sat, 2016-12-03 at 20:49 -0600, kevin wrote:
>         > > > Yes, yes, that I know, Jeff.  :)
>         > > > 
>         > > > What I was specifically speaking to was that ICANN could then 
> sell
>         > > > off .OSS and .pirate and all the others and what will we do 
> ...?
>         > > > Scramble to find a new .tld ?
>         > > > 
>         > > > Of course, I'm speaking from a principle point of view when I 
> saw we
>         > > > ignore .free, for the reasons I spoke.
>         > > > 
>         > > > At the end of the day, if everyone with a .free is willing to 
> move over
>         > > > to a .lib(re/er), then ...  hey ...  no biggie.  :D
>         > > > 
>         > > > Kevin
>         > > > 
>         > > > On Sat, 2016-12-03 at 19:37 -0700, Jeff Taylor wrote:
>         > > > > On 12/03/2016 07:16 PM, kevin wrote:
>         > > > > > As for ICANN, they could simply look at all OpenNIC tlds 
> and grab them
>         > > > > > for ICANN use.
>         > > > > Actually that's not true.  We generate our own root zone 
> for opennic, 
>         > > > > and that script forces opennic TLDs to take precedence and 
> override any 
>         > > > > conflicting ICANN domains.  So even in our current 
> situation where 
>         > > > > Amazon's .free has made it into the ICANN root, we opennic 
> users still 
>         > > > > have full access to our existing domains.  The only way for 
> the ICANN 
>         > > > > TLD to get into our root zone is if I remove the references 
> to opennic's 
>         > > > > TLD first.  If we voted to create our own .com zone, we 
> could do it 
>         > > > > because we maintain full control of the zone files used by 
> opennic from 
>         > > > > top to bottom.  If we wanted to maintain ICANN's .com zone, 
> but replace 
>         > > > > google.com with our own domain, we could do that too.
>         > > > > 
>         > > > > In case you don't realize it, I wrote the scripts and have 
> been 
>         > > > > maintaining opennic's root zone for a number of years.  
> Most people 
>         > > > > never hear about this because for the most part everything 
> runs smoothly 
>         > > > > and your queries always return the results that you expect 
> (yes there 
>         > > > > have been some hiccups and I do what I can to try to make 
> the scripts 
>         > > > > more bulletproof when something breaks).  If I had ever 
> betrayed that 
>         > > > > trust, you can bet that everyone would have known about it!
>         > > > > 
>         > > > > However the point is that the root zone is an absolutely 
> critical piece 
>         > > > > of the DNS infrastructure, and changes to the root can have 
> significant 
>         > > > > affects on how you see the whole internet.  We can shape 
> that view 
>         > > > > however we want, and ICANN cannot simply reserve our 
> existing TLDs and 
>         > > > > shut us down.  The initial purpose of opennic was to show 
> that ICANN 
>         > > > > does not HAVE to be the ones in control of the internet, 
> and that anyone 
>         > > > > can set up a DNS service to do the same thing as them, but 
> without the 
>         > > > > huge costs.  We've been here for over 16 years and have a 
> world-wide 
>         > > > > presence.  They may try ignore us, but the proof is here 
> that ICANN is 
>         > > > > not actually as important as they would like to think.
>         > > > > 
>         > > > > --------
>         > > > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
>         > > > > You may unsubscribe by emailing 
> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>         > > 
>         > > 
>         > > --------
>         > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
>         > > You may unsubscribe by emailing 
> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>         > 
>         > 
>         > 
>         > 
>         > --------
>         > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
>         > You may unsubscribe by emailing 
> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>         
>         
>         
>         
>         --------
>         You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>         You may unsubscribe by emailing
>         discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org