←back to thread

634 points RVRX | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
ajdude ◴[] No.43712307[source]
A few years ago I had a .us TLD. I eventually decided that I probably shouldn't be reliant on a country code for my domain, it's the same reason why I don't use .io

I'm not saying that this couldn't have happened with a gTLD But why put your brand at the mercy of a government like that?

replies(5): >>43712339 #>>43712351 #>>43712427 #>>43712517 #>>43713171 #
VWWHFSfQ ◴[] No.43712427[source]
> But why put your brand at the mercy of a government like that?

Literally every single TLD is administered by a government.

.com itself is under jurisdiction of USA and operated by Verisign

replies(3): >>43713430 #>>43713921 #>>43719234 #
1. AStonesThrow ◴[] No.43713430[source]
> Literally every single TLD is administered by a government.

False. I’m not sure what you’re trying to assert, but governments don’t necessarily need to control/admin gTLDs, and as far as ccTLDs go, they’re under jurisdiction of the corresponding nation, usually, but they’re going to be “administered” by a tech company that holds a contract.

Anyway, “.com” does indeed answer to U.S. jurisdiction, despite being technically a gTLD, but registrations are not restricted to US-based entities. The main things that keep “.com” associated with the USA include the history/legacy of this quintessential “original” domain, as well as a general support from major countries that provide a “second-level” commercial domain, such as “.co.uk”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.com

replies(1): >>43713591 #
2. nottorp ◴[] No.43713591[source]
> “.com” does indeed answer to U.S. jurisdiction

... which is a problem lately ... and may have been even in the past for some niches ...