Notice concerning .eu domains registered by UK residents
eurid.eu
eurid.eu
Imagine the thousands of people using X@Y.eu as a personal email address. Those domains will be made available for purchase soon thereafter:
> "Twelve months after the UK withdrawal, i.e. on 30 March 2020 00:00:00 CET, all the affected domain names will be REVOKED, and will become AVAILABLE for general registration. For security and stability reasons, the release of all affected domain names will occur in batches from the time they become available."
New gTLDs are either corporate owned (.google) or were targeted at dotless domains (.diamonds). The ICANN SSAC killed the business model for the latter after companies had laid out millions, so they will likely face solvency issues in the coming years.
ccTLDs are dependent on the political future of the government they are tied to (.ly and Libya is a good example), but at least you have a good idea up front of what you are hitching your cart to.
Brexit is all about a minority taking away other peoples rights. Blaming the EU for this is disingenuous at best
And it is still possible to keep those .eu domains: simply make sure you're an EU citizen or transfer the name to an EU entity. I wonder if Estonia's e-residency might help here.
0 - One of the proposals to expand the .eu domain is to permit any EU citizen living anywhere on the planet to register a .eu domain but it's not gone into effect yet.
Sorry facebook but you can no longer have the facebook.com domain because blah blah blah reasons.
Any references for this? Not doubting but interested.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.ly#Domain_hacks
The punchline is that there's no restriction on what a ccTLD operator can do under their namespace. They aren't governed by ICANN regulations. It's common to restrict domains on ccTLDs to be related to entities doing business in that country, and to require verification of such upon registration (and take it away later if it's found to be in violation).
And even if they're behaving in a seemingly sane way now, they can always change policies down the line. With gTLDs there's real contractual protection; you have ownership rights of those domains that don't exist in the same sense for ccTLDs.
Relevant information starts from part 3
I know a lot of people who were burned by the .us registrars but the most malicious example has to whoever in charge of .tk: The domains are offered for free, however once you managed to build a consistent traffic they are often held hostage to sell premium services or worse, taken away from owners and sold to the next highest bidder.
.eu stands for EU, not just generic "europe".
Since when is the UK "on the continent"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent#/media/File:Continen...
Which continent do you think the UK is on?
A popular term in the UK is "continental Europe" or "the continent" for the mainland, whereas the islands are considered to not be "on the continent". Continents are basically a made up structure anyway, their definition is more by convention than geology.
I'd probably rather question whether the ".eu" tld means "Europe" (in which case there's a reasonable argument to be made that UK residents should be permitted to use it even post Brexit) or if it means "European Union" (which'd mean the UK voted to opt out of being able to use it).
They feel rather strongly about this and other issues that might not seem entirely correct to people with a different perspective. I suppose that's what ultimately caused this situation in the first place.
The article is about the UK, which is leaving the EU? Do you think the western bit of Russia, where the majority of their population lives, should have a right to register .eu domains?
Norway is still allowed to register EU domains. This seems spiteful.
Not at all. The statement is in fact explicit on the subject: "Subject to any transitional arrangement that may be contained in a possible withdrawal agreement..."
Norway has such an agreement with the EU. The UK is welcome to put such an agreement in place as well, but appears to be opting not to. Lacking any other agreement, after the exit date the UK will have, at its own request, no legal ties to any EU institutions so why should this one be considered any different?
Something else it is reminiscent of is joining a cult such as scientology. All reassurances and promises on the way in ... but when you try to leave... So in some sense of course Norway has X and Y. They gained these things whilst increasing integration with the EU.
Yes I know. Leave voters are less educated and somewhat racist statistically.
The general EU position on rules is also deeply undemocratic in the sense that the unlimited commitment was not properly communicated or admitted to at the time all this was put into place.
What we wanted out of the EU was a consensual free trade arrangement not to support an expansionistic political project that ultimately wants to disolve it's constituent nations.
Then if you break it down, there is the question of eurosceptics. Where is their influence? Have they ever successfully reigned in the EU or got it to reverse anything? They are represented in the parliament but it is a toothless/show organisation.
[0] Or at least, the people currently in charge of the UK government want out. According to polls, many of the people of the UK have by now acquired a better sense of the consequences. The government seems unwilling to listen to them, though.
The reason I said gas lighting is because of the lack of acknowledgement of another point of view, and essentially 0 concession or charitability. We can have different values, and if you are honest you have to allow for the fact that that means I can value the bad in the EU project greater than the good. But instead you just say, no it's stupid, it makes no sense to want to leave, rules are rules.
The population are marginally agreeing it was a bad idea (something like 48%-42%) because of the difficulty of the process and the embarassment of the national government. That is it may not be worth our while getting out. To me however it proves that you should get out since it is not a consensual or honest project. If it had been I wouldn't be wanting to leave ...
"A .eu website tells customers that the brand concerns a legal entity in the European Union, Iceland, Liechtenstein or Norway and, as such, is subject to the trading and consumer laws of these countries."
Norway is part of the single market with the EEA and follows EU commercial laws.
The UK, as far as we know, won't.
The problem is that they don't want that. They'd prefer to pick and choose which parts of the common market they get to stay in, while leaving other parts of the common market, and it just doesn't work that way.
The UK explicitly rejected it in favour of hard Brexit as it currently stands and won’t.