j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckMÐ <div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28145#msg28145">Quote from: ribuck on December 08, 2010, 04:00:02 PM</a></div><div class="quote">I suggest that we exclude <b>all</b> existing top level domains from DomainChain registration. So no-one will be able to register <i>google.com</i> through this system. They could, however, register <i>google.domain</i> but they would probably have to fight with Google in court under trademark law.<br/><br/>We really don't want the DomainChain system saying that it will "protect" 1000 names but "refuse to protect" all the rest.<br/></div><br/>Agreed. I suggested in my previous domain allocation system that the standard ICANN/InterNIC domains and perhaps to be fair some of the domains currently being done with other networks like OpenNIC and the .onion "domain" of the Bittorrent network ought to be held in "reserve" as a part of the internal protocol we are setting up here. My suggested domain allocation system would have that as an organic part of the system although it would be useful to hold these TLD in escrow for whenever or if ICANN wants to have control of them.<br/><br/>Since to use one of the TLDs with a server you would need to have it assigned to an IP address of some sort, somebody like Google could go aver "google.btc" as a trademark violation by searching for the network which assigned the IP address of the server using that name. If the domain record points to 127.0.0.1, it really isn't a threat to Google until that address changes anyway. I agree that this is beyond the scope of this protocol to take care of the Alexa top 1000 names and the only real issue is spoofing existing domain names being used by other DNS registries.<br/><br/>As a side note, during the actual reference implementation of one of these servers it would be nice to throw a bone to OpenNIC and the "dot P2P" guys (presuming they set up their own system) to forward DNS requests that might fall under those respective domain registries. This is sort of a tip of the hat to say thanks for making sure ICANN doesn't have 100% exclusive control over domain registrations and to support what I think are good projects in their own right even if they aren't a P2P distributed naming system. That might even get a reciprocal agreement with those alternate domain registries to spread these registrations with the DomainChain registries much further at least initially.</div> text/html
https://whatsonchain.com/tx/273f63cb96c2c679c9221879c622cf4e09e9caa0bbd7ece303b7efc0b3d00cee