full-disclosure - Is Verisign Breaking the Law [Was: Re: Petition against Verislime's DNS Abuse]

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: jonathan at nuclearelephant.com (Jonathan A. Zdziarski)
Subject: Is Verisign Breaking the Law [Was: Re: Petition against
 Verislime's DNS Abuse]

Isn't the Post still run by the Moonies?

> That's right. At least that Washington Post article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A996-2003Sep12.html)
> was a start, and I'm quite sure some others will follow.

You know this has got me wondering if Verisign may soon be breaking the
new Cybersquatting law that was recently passed by the House.  The bill
as I recall, backed by the MPAA (so they ARE good for something!) was
designed to protect online trademarks by making it illegal to use
similar sounding domain names to capture unfortunate web users who
mis-spelled the domain.

If this bill were to pass the senate (and I don't believe it's gotten
shot down yet, although there is speculation), Verisign could be liable
for up to $100,000 in damages _per domain_ they squatted.  The fact that
this bill also protects people from hitting nasty porn sites when they
misspell domains may be the one thing that pushes it through the
senate.  Definitely an interesting perspective; looking at this as
trademark infringement by Verisign.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030918/9009fd81/attachment.html