.sj/.bv == privacy?

[jra at baylink.com (Jay Ashworth)]

Here's an interesting, and fairly thoughtful and well written, piece about talks going on in Norway to utilize two ccTLDs which are assigned to the country for outlying territories for the purpose of a specialty domain registry where registrants (such as hosting companies) would be contractually required to guarantee privacy to their end customers.

I think the idea has some merit, myself; I have always preferred to see municipalities, frex, registered in domains where it's clear they had to /be the municipality/ to get the registration... to avoid things like the Largo.com Joe job of earlier years.  (Yay, RFC1480!)

But I'm not sure if a ccTLD is the place to put that. I'm sure the argument is "well this puts the weight of the country of Norway behind it". But that's a sword that cuts both ways.

http://www.zdnet.com/how-two-remote-arctic-territories-became-the-front-line-in-the-battle-for-internet-privacy-7000034245/
-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.