From: Matthew Black (no email)
Date: Thu Jan 18 2007 - 10:05:25 EST
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:38:14 -0600
"Travis H." <travis+> wrote:
[...snip]
> The domain name system has enough problems (is mazdausa.com really related
> to mazda.com?) without involving javascript and ActiveX, but they could be
> corrected with proper education (how about keeping every URL under one
> second-level domain related to your company, perhaps companyname.com)
This presupposes that corporations have a more significant claim
to domain names than individuals. Does anybody recall the fiasco
between ETOY.COM and ETOYS.COM? The former was created by an artist
years before the now defunct toy retailer. ETOYS' corporate bullying
took away the artist's longstanding domain claiming it might confuse
consumers.
"Proper education" cannot be achieved ever. Who should have the
rights to MCDONALDS.COM or FORD.COM? A large multinational
corporation or the entity which set-up an on-line presence first?
Assuming here that someone isn't domain squatting or abusing
trademarks, for example, FORD's hamburger company advertising
automobiles. Trademarks in themselves do not grant domain rights,
just exclusive use of a name as a PARTICULAR type of business.
That is the real problem.
Phishing problems will not be corrected without multinational
government coooperation (which I fear for other reasons) because
the problems cross teritorial boarders. I received a clever
phishing attempt "from" Chase Manhattan Bank directing me to
the domain chaserewards.com. This is more a matter of companies
informing their customers which domain names are valid.
</RANT>
matthew black
network services
california state university, long beach
|
|
|