>The Top 100 Emerging Generic
>Toplevel Domains (gTLDs)
>
>space   3213
>web     2813
>art     1344
>shop    1251
>info    929
>sex     913
>zone    854
>design  794
>music   779
>firm    766
>media   748
>travel  735
>online  624
>inc     614
>arts    468
>mail    447
>home    436
>ltd     423
>mag     422
>bank    417
>usa     415
>world   414
>x       409
>2000    404
>corp    397
>news    393
>free    389
>fuck    381
>service 373
>family  372
>games   364
>cam     361
>casino  356
>auction 353
>asia    352
>fun     350
>mall    350
>cafe    348
>law     352
>love    346
>hacker  341
>internet        338
>market  334
>jam     333
>cat     328
>zero    328
>consulting      326
>city    324
>radio   324
>wine    323
>sports  323
>software        323
>fax     320
>channel 319
>club    319
>sale    318
>hole    317
>time    313
>graphics        313
>game    313
>network 313
>4u      312
>film    311
>europe  311
>lab     309
>4all    310
>trade   307
>irc     306
>site    305
>host    305
>one     305
>school  305
>power   305
>magazine        304
>computer        304
>group   302
>systems 302
>girl    302
>moon    300
>show    300
>watch   300
>books   299
>commerce        299
>productions     299
>tech    298
>now     296
>med     295
>solutions       295
>agency  294
>nyc     294
>red     293
>soft    293
>shoes   292
>pub     292
>box     291
>insurance       290
>cool    290
>etc     290
>computers       289
>photo   289
>
>If you could only choose 10 new gTLDs what would they be?
>Should you stop there?  If not, what are the limits?
>(think not just in terms of numbers, but in terms of
>use and diversity...)
>
>The Working Group C (WG-C) of the ICANN Domain Name Supporting
>Organization (DNSO) is tasked with making recommendations for the
addition
>ofnew gTLDs to the internet's root so that they will become globally
>operable.   A proposal is to select between six and ten new gTLDs to
>activate in a "testbed" period, where different technical models and
>policies will be developed and hopefully successfully deployed.
>
>There is a public comment period that ends on January 10, 1999 that
will
>affect the direction of the policy making decisions that will effect
every
>internet user from now on, from issues of domain name rights and
freedoms
>vs. intellectual property, to privacy (i.e. ICANN's mandatory database
>escrow of personal contact information).
>It is important that you take some time and review the proposals
presented
>by WG-C and comment on them.  It is equally important that you voice
your
>positions on the policies that will ultimately affect all internet
users.
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/announce/Archives/msg00054.html
>
>Issues revolving around domain names include the rights to publish
>(domains are CONTENT) and the rights to access (without a domain, your
>site is difficilt to reach, or unreachable), as well as your rights to
>privacy (who has access to your personal information tied to your
domain,
>and under what circumstances).
>
>Leonardo v. Leonardo, Etoys v. Etoy, and the recent actions of the
DVDCCA
>are just a taste of the times to come unless proactive measures are
taken.
>Already the ICANN/WIPO/NSI policies for legacy domains, COM., ORG.,
NET.,
>are exhibiting their negative and opressive effects.  It is important
to
>stop these policies from ruling the new gTLDs that will soon come
about,
>in possibly a mixed environment of ICANN ruled TLDs (such as COM.,
ORG.,
>NET., and the "six to ten" ICANN gTLDs, and "FREE gTLDs" that are run
by
>autonomous entities, much as the country code ccTLDs are today--they
are
>run independently and are not subject to the rule of ICANN.
>
>Name.Space has in place what it believes a model policy for fair use of

>and access to the internet namespace.  Technology and policy through
>practice, evolved through the constant interaction with the users and
the
>systems which enable their access, to provide fairness and freedoms of
>speech and privacy for the users of the internet.
>http://namespace.org/policy
>
>The forced "gentrification" and "disneyfication" of cyberspace need not

>extend to all aspects of it.  Freedoms are being negotiated away, far
from
>public view, by commercial contracts.  The internet is not borderless,
nor
>is it public--it is a private road connecting gated communities,
subject
>to the terms and conditions the commercial service agreements that bind

it
>all together, creating one interwoven private commercial space.  There
is
>no guaranteed free speech or Constitutional protections on this private

>property.  There is potential coercion and "reverse censorship", much
more
>insidious than the "reverse hijacking" as in Etoys v. Etoy.  Network
>Solutions, Inc. (NSI, a/k/a f/k/a/ InterNIC)has won the right in court
>First Amendment protection, as a private company, NOT to publish
anything
>it judges inappropriate.  Their First Amendment rights to Free Speech
are
>protected over YOURS because they own the PROPERTY that provides you
with
>their domain services.
>
>When Thing.net was cut off by their upstream provider, many cried
>"CENSORSHIP".  Perhaps it was, in spirit, but the Denial of Service
(DoS)
>attack was in fact a violation of the commercial use policy and service

>agreement between Thing.net and their upstream provider.
>
>The days are counting down to when the last of your rights will be
>negotiated away in backroom deals between commercial companies.  Send
your
>comments to ICANN by January 10, 2000, 18.00 CET.
>
>Show your support for DNS FREEDOM while there is still a chance.
>
>- --Paul Garrin
>
>switch your dns to Name.Space http://namespace.org/switch
>
>- ---------------------------------------------------------
>Get Free Private Encrypted Email https://mail.lokmail.net
>