I think what really happened here is that someone at the Libyan domain authority decided they wanted the name and made up a story in order to seize it. I've heard of other cases of .ly names being confiscated, and for this reason we advise YC startups not to depend on them.
Yes, this is what I think happened too (I'm the original owner of vb.ly and that's my blog post linked above)
EDIT: and therefore I do feel Bit.ly need to be worried - perhaps they'll be able to do a deal rather than have their domain removed but clearly something is stirring here thus ".ly domain space to be considered unsafe".
I guess that may have been a little predictable from TFA, but I'm regularly surprised by the folks who crop up at HN. I've been reading both your and VB's work for years, it is a funny coincidence to discover there is an relationship between you.
Well, your girlfriend is obviously an adult! Case closed! ;-)
More seriously, she does seem to be rather, er, focused on the topic of sex... Which is great, but I can see why they would object, if sex-related things are banned in Lybia.
to your main point: Well that's kind the issue isn't it? Yes Violet is 'focused on the topic of sex' she's a leading author in the field (30+ books on Amazon), appears on Oprah show about the topic, lectures at universities, etc.
But if you are right, isn't that too far if a domain authority removes someone's domain because the line of work and academic research they are in? Like I said, the site itself was hardly adult, even if Violet's own life, work and research is against their laws (somehow, perhaps).
Yes, and that's the reason given for this domain name being reclaimed. Drinking alcohol and women showing bare arms are both illegal under Sharia law, and the front page showed Violet Blue drinking beer and showing bare arms. It's difficult for many foreigners to know exactly what is and isn't legal under Sharia law, so it's difficult to know if a domain would be ok or not.
However nic.ly are now also warning they don't allow ownership of short .ly domains by foreigners, only Libyan nationals. This sounds to me like they want more money or an excuse to take down domains they simply don't like, but is a real problem if they ever decided they want in on the bit.ly action.
The vb.ly site owners keep claiming that the content may be adult but that the domain name isn't. This is a weak argument in my mind, and I believe there's a precedent of domain names registered exclusively for the act of malware propagation being taken down.
You can't sell dildos and vibrators in Texas, and it's not because of Sharia law.
Hindu activists in India made death threats and stormed theaters because of a film about a lesbian relationship.
Sharia law is not the only reason for repressive attitudes toward sex.
I mean, really. They're, what, 30-40 years behind the cultural norms of the US, in this case? You don't really need to pin that on Sharia, when it's far more likely that it's just cultural.
It wasn't that long ago in the US that nothing was open on Sundays.
> You don't really need to pin that on Sharia, when it's far more likely that it's just cultural. (emph. added)
Because cultural reasons are completely separate from religion? Religion is the only reason people like to tell others what they can and can’t do in private, especially in a democracy like Texas, where it shouldn’t be considered Constitutional to outlaw "dildos and vibrators."
A agree, but there's a tendency among some these days to tout the boogeyman of sharia law. And there's an implication that there's something alien about Libya, that being restrictive of sexual matter is somehow unique to sharia law, that without sharia law Libya would be just like the US, and that Christians wouldn't do anything similar.
Which is just nonsense. Conservatives are conservative. Libya did this thing, and John Ashcroft covered up a statue's tit.
Bringing sharia into it is just buying into the latest thing pants-wetting wingnuts are using to scare themselves.
Maybe I’m foolish, but I think that denying the involvement of sharia law buys us nothing, but recognizing similarities with other conservative censorship tendencies (e.g. in Christendom) — as you have — can be a enlightening.
Nothing in there about the Intertubes, of course, and it's quite vague about exactly what constitutes pornography, but basically, you need a license from the Ministry of the Interior or the Ministry of Local Government, and if you violate it they can throw you in jail for three to six years and fine you.
Does this not apply to all ccTLDs though? My understanding was that the majority of ccTLDs are controlled in a way that they are able to easily "reclaim" any domain they want at any time without breaking any "rules"...
Each ccTLD is delegated to a competent operator within the country it is designated. In almost all cases (except some historic ones) this is to an entity with approval of the national government of the country. They in turn set their own regulations on domain eligibility criteria, pricing and so forth.
So when you buy a .ME domain, you are subject to the relevant law and regulation of Montenegro, for .CO in Colombia, for .LY in Libya and so forth. If those countries elect to allow registrations outside their borders, that is their choice, but there is no external regulation on how they do that. They are accountable internally to the local Internet community of the country, and the local laws.
ICANN, on the other hand, is responsible for regulating many aspects for generic top-level domains (currently TLDs with 3 or more characters, such as .COM, .NET, .INFO).
I have evidence as this is essentially what happened to us. We purchased .ly variant of our domain name through an authorized Libyan registrar about 10 months ago. It was seized back without explanation a few days later. When I contacted the registrar I was told that the domain was available for "four figures" through domains.ly (an aftermarket .ly reseller service that is operated by the same authorized registrar we used to purchase the domain initially). The domain wasn't critical, so we didn't pursue it any further.
