News You Can't Use: New .sucks Domain Stirs Up Storm Over Free Speech

Looking for exciting material on the cobweb related to straws, candy canes and industrial vacuums? Well, you're in luck, because the exciting new "Dot Sucks" revolution is upon us. Think of the amazing lamprey sites! Wait, I've just been told it will be little more than garbled anger directed at broad-side-of-a-barn targets like Google, Facebook and Taylor Swift. Finally a chance to make that "Why thar no not like button on da web book" page that the world is practically begging for. Or maybe not, because it turns out the monied elites that rule over us aren't thrilled with the idea of periods and suck being placed after their names by the new breed of Solzhenitsyns eager to battle the Beast System and also bad pop music.

The new Internet domain .sucks has stirred up a firestorm over free online speech and the potential for extortion against companies and individuals.

Yes, you read correctly, extortion. We have created an AaronZehner.sucks site full of lies and character assassinations. Leave ten million in unmarked bills in a P.O. Box or suffer the full wrath of a new top level domain no one has actually heard of.

The company operating this new domain claims it is "designed to help consumers find their voices and allow companies to find the value in criticism."

We are high-minded and noble heroes who use blowjob language to appeal to humanity's worst impulses. Finally that negative review of Microsoft products will have a home, unlike now where they have successfully scoured any and all criticism from the inner-tubes.

But critics see it as a shakedown scheme designed to force companies and individuals to fork over cash to keep an unfavorable or offensive website offline.

It's so hard to pick a side in this fight, what with everyone being so completely awful.

According to media reports, Microsoft, Facebook, Google and other large companies have bought up the domains by exercising their trademark priority rights, presumably with no intent to use them. Music star Taylor Swift reportedly did the same thing.

Wow, she really can turn those tables. Trouble, trouble. Shook this one right off. Thank you lame commercial gym for forcibly exposing me to this garbage to the point where I can reference it effortlessly.

Also, our ruling reptiles seem to be really afraid of a few semi-literate dirt bags creating special "you suck" sites for them. It's almost like this all just a giant house of cards. 18 trillion in debt you say? Huh, how about that.

What has fueled concerns is that the domain registrar, a Canadian-based company called Vox Populi, is charging $2,500 for the website names -- far more than a typical website registration of $10 to $25 -- before the names are opened to the public on June 1.

Oh, Canada. It's the neighbor that seems normal enough, but has a basement full of dope and holds regular wife-swap parties. Anything goes up there, man.

This really is some sleazy stuff, in all seriousness.

The Intellectual Property Constituency, an advisory group to the global Internet domain regulator, complained last month that the "exorbitant sums" are effectively a "shakedown scheme" to get money from companies and others.

They already got their T. Swizzle money, bro. It's a little late for this.

After the June 1 deadline, online trolls or "cybersquatters" could buy up the names and then extort even higher prices, according to the group which includes film, software and music industry associations and other trademark organizations.

Another victory for the free market! Look at all the value that's being created by the invisible hand of human garbage!

The group last month urged the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which manages the domain system, to stop the .sucks domain before it goes live.

Please vaguely defined shadow entity, stop this Canadian evil!

"Break down the cockpit doors, American internet! Assume the controls!"

Atallah told AFP however that as a result of the complaint, ICANN decided to forward the matter to regulators in the United States and Canada.

Regulators. We regulate any stealing of billionaire intellectual property. We're damn good, too. But you can't be any geek from a vaguely defined governing body. Gotta be handy with the domains, earn your keep.

John Berard, chief executive at Vox Populi, told AFP the new domain is something that companies can use to engage with consumers, and that he sees the word "sucks" as "edgy" but not pejorative.

It might have been edgy in 1981. Now with children's programs routinely spewing the foulest of foul words, to say nothing of R-13 movies for preteens, I don't think so.

"We think we're creating an opportunity for interaction that is meaningful," he said.

I'd respect you more if you were honest about your moral leprosy, I really would.

"If a company were to establish its own .sucks site and drive that discussion to a centralized location it might be quite a valuable asset."

Think of the synergy, raised awareness, cross-branding and strategic communication these fellatio-themed sites will allow. 

Berard added that the pricing "reflects what we believe to be the value of the names."

This dot suck site is a valuable commodity! Really!

Asked about ICANN's letter to regulators, Berard said, "I don't think that anyone who takes a look will find a problem."

Please do not "mount up."

The debate comes with ICANN acting to vastly expand the number of so-called generic top-level domains (gTLDs) from the traditional ones like .com and .gov, including some such as .porn and .wine.

Well, at least we have our priorities straight. Please visit my new site at EndtheUnitedNations.wine.

Full Article

Komment Korner  

Voltaire highly influenced our Founders and Framers

Obama.sucks is already taken

www.hillary.sucks

Free speech free speech for the dumb. Free speech free speech for the dumb.

Why not ".sux?"

Aaron Zehner is the author of "The Foolchild Invention" available in paperback and e-book format. Read free excerpts here and here.

News You Can't Use: Pols Promise a Solution Against ‘Elmo Bullies’

New York City ain't no joke, man. If the air and water don't kill you the druggers, violence mobs and humanoid underground dwellers will. Even the most effeminate of children's characters are weaponized into aggressive panhandlers and con artists. Tickle me Elmo? Try, "Intimidate you with physical violence into making a 'donation' to the heroin fund Elmo." Since even the Death Wish vigilante isn't going to shoot junkies dressed up as Big Bird or whatever, it's up to "Pols" to spring into action and attempt to legislate away urban rot that's so virulent it even infected wussy kid stuff.

Though complaints about Times Square can fill an entire encyclopedia, at the latest Times Square Alliance’s Midtown conditions meeting, one issue took center stage: how to deal with Elmo, Hello Kitty and Spiderman, among other costumed characters.

I once visited the "Complaints on Time Square" Wikipedia page and it gave my computer about a hundred viruses, broke both my arms and stole the radio from my car. I don't recommend it.

When they came for the break dancers I didn't say anything because I wasn't a break dancer. When they came for the untreated mentally ill drug abusers dressed up like cutesy Japanese nonsense I didn't say anything...etc.

Costumed characters that panhandle or offer pictures in exchange for money have proliferated in Times Square, as noted by the Wall Street Journal, adding to the usual commercial chaos of the famed town square.

"It's making it hard for me to sell pencils, crude window washing and miniature American flags to raise funds to buy tiny white rocks."

And while they may seem cuddly, elected officials said the characters are a serious problem.

Let's explode the myth of the "lovable meth addict," once and for all time.

This is a cancer on Times Square that has to be excised soon.

"You're a disease, Hello Kitty, and I'm the cure." *repeatedly fires combat shotgun*

“The panhandlers are exploiting the First Amendment, but I don’t think you have a First Amendment right to harass and threaten people as some of these characters have done.”

Can we just add an amendment to the Bill of Rights that very clearly states "None of these rights apply if you're wearing a muppet-themed costume." Yup, we're gonna start quartering soldiers in the house of the guy that dresses up as "Scooter."

The alliance’s director, Tim Tompkins, said they’re not all bad — but their presence, and the number of complaints, has grown in the last two years.

There's at least two or three who don't shoot up or menace people, so we're kind of in a tight spot.

“The problem is not with the folks that are out there making kids happy in an appropriate way, the problem is the folks that are both subtly and not so subtly intimidating and harassing people,” Mr. Tompkins said.

This is NYC pal, there aren't any "folks" here. Try dope-heads, mole people and walking, anthropomorphic evil. Whoever it was that taught politicians "people will trust you more if you use circa 1930 Alabama syntax" deserves the worst.

The companies that own the characters being depicted are also interested in addressing this issue, Mr. Tompkins added, and having a way to get troublemakers out of their character’s costumes. He called on the City Council to regulate them.

"I sold you a costume depicting our intellectual property and then sued you for wearing it!" Logic.

City Councils. We regulate any harassing of "folks" by depictions of animated characters. We're damn good too. But you can't be any geek off the streets. Gotta be handy with the illogical application of capitalism and our legal system, earn your keep.

“If you have a licensing scheme, then you have the ability to leave the people alone who are doing the right thing, but also go after the people that are not doing the right thing” he added.

We used to call this force "God." It's now more correctly identified as a "licensing scheme." It will make people do right and not do not right. Somehow.

Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer told reporters she was open to examining a slew of possible solutions.

"We got a whole heapin' helpin' of in-ter-esting solutions for the folks on God's Green Earth, not to mention our costumed brothers and sisters."

Put him in jail!

“Legally, what do we want to do?  We want to regulate them? We want them to be licensed? How do we not infringe on the First Amendment?” she asked.

Obviously more red tape and bureaucracy is the answer, but how to do it?

“They accost people. I’ve seen it with my own eyes — they ask to take a picture, they ask for money, they chase people to the ATM sometimes for money. They are very aggressive and it doesn’t show a good picture of New York,” Ms. Brewer said.

If we're going to win that bid to have the entire city transformed into a prison colony we're going to have to improve that image a little.

“We’ve talked with our legal department about how we craft this legislation to allow you to express yourself, because I support freedom of speech and your right to freely act, speak and engage, but the minute you violate somebody else’s space then you have to be held accountable,” he said.

Or you could just actually enforce existing laws, whatever.

Mr. King seemed confident about the future of the bill. “I do expect huge support of the council members, I do,” he said.

Moments later he was torn to pieces and devoured by C.H.U.Ds.

Full Article.

Komment Korner   

I'm not saying it's good or it's right, but it is caused by liberal and democrat policy.

The only cancer in new York are the Communists who run it.

You mean like how NYC has a real handle on licensing Taxis. AHHAHAH Character medallions?

Just like the stings to bust criminals that rob drunks on the trains.

Check Out My Books!

Aaron Zehner is the author of "Posts from the Underground," now available in paperback and e-book. Read free excerpts here and here.

His first novel "The Foolchild Invention" is also available in paperback and e-book format. Read free excerpts here and here.