[The short version, since ICANN can't seem to read very
far into any document: I oppose the non-profit-only restriction being suggested for
the .org TLD. Feel free to create the .npo TLD for such organizations. Is the new
regime going to take away .com domains if their owners _don't_ make a profit? Watch
Our story so far: ICANN, in preparing to divest themselves of the
.org Top Level Domain (TLD), are saying, in effect: in the future, only non-profit
organizations should be able to register .org domains, and any existing .org holders
that don't measure up to a to-be-determined standard of non-profitness should have
their domains taken away.
ICANN trumpets a return to what they call the _intended_
function of .org:
"The net result of this would be a .org registry returned [...]
to its originally intended function as a registry operated by and for non-profit
the issues to be determined in this transition is whether .org should be limited
to registrations only by non-commercial entities"
cites RFC 1561 when arguing about country-style TLD's:
"It is important to note
that ccTLD matters are governed by the longstanding principle, noted by Jon Postel
in RFC 1591, that 'Concerns about "rights" and "ownership" of domains are inappropriate.
It is appropriate to be concerned about "responsibilities" and "service" to the community.'"
And when explaining the
history of TLD's:
"Examples of unrestricted TLDs include .com, .net, and .org.
(Note that RFC 1591 states that these domains are intended for various uses. As a
practical matter, however, anyone may register and use names in these domains for
anyone at ICANN looked at RFC 1591 while formulating the argument that they're returning
.org to its intended purpose? It does not contain the words "non-profit", "not-for-profit",
or even "profit" on its own. The description of the generic domain ORG reads:
- This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for organizations that didn't
fit anywhere else. Some non-government organizations may fit here."
yourself in the associated link:
rather that existing .org owners (myself included) got to keep their domains. But
even if they're taken away, it's dishonest to support that action by claiming a return
to something that never existed.