{"id":41803,"date":"2002-03-08T10:28:57","date_gmt":"2002-03-08T18:28:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ma.tt\/?p=41803"},"modified":"2012-09-23T21:14:48","modified_gmt":"2012-09-24T04:14:48","slug":"ellen-rony-on-icann","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ma.tt\/2002\/03\/ellen-rony-on-icann\/","title":{"rendered":"Ellen Rony on ICANN"},"content":{"rendered":"
Interesting observations:<\/p>\n
\nThis presents an interesting conundrum for the DOC-ICANN MoU, notwithstanding the pesky issue of who gets to determin what content is “kids-safe”–and how.<\/p>\n
Consider:
\n* ICANN rejected four .KIDs applications in its new TLD process
\n* New Net launched a .KIDS in its first round of alternative TLDs
\n* A .KIDS TLD already exists in the parallel root server system http:\/\/root-dns.org\/VueDig\/VueDig_tld.php?record=NS&tld=kids&submit=Submit<\/a><\/p>\nAll hail “Internet stability”.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Interesting observations: This presents an interesting conundrum for the DOC-ICANN MoU, notwithstanding the pesky issue of who gets to determin what content is “kids-safe”–and how. Consider: * ICANN rejected four .KIDs applications in its new TLD process * New Net launched a .KIDS in its first round of alternative TLDs * A .KIDS TLD already … Continue reading Ellen Rony on ICANN<\/span>