Ever since the dawn of the internet, most people have only wanted one thing… a place on the internet to call their own. A spot that’s free of judgement or censorship. A page to show whatever they want online.
Other kinds of people, however––individuals with long necks and even longer lifespans––have craved something better. They have dreamed of eating up the entire space available on the internet. They have collected as many domain names as they can. They’ve collected them to flip and sell later for a profit. They’ve collected them with the sole purpose of sending people to sketchy websites. They’ve collected them for no better reasons than “ok that’s cool” as justification.
Now, thanks to these special individuals, domain names as we know it are becoming a thing of the past. With growing concerns about fairness and access to domain spaces, there’s been a recent push to look closely at how domain names are used and find new ways to manage them.
Two townhouse lawmakers, Ahmed Fadakin and Taiye Franco, have been the most vocal in the domain name conversations, each proposing distinct solutions.
Ahmed Fadakin, a tech entrepreneur, townhouse representative and third son of former Rivers state Governor Julius Fadakin, is of the position that everyone should only be able to have one domain name in their lifetime. In Fadakin’s plan, individuals who require more than one domain name would need to create what he calls “Field Names.” These are basically subdomains––a domain address inside another domain address.
Although Fadakin acknowledges that the use of subdomains is already quite popular in the tech world, one of Fadakin’s goals is to rechristen the concept of subdomains as “Field Names” to distinguish its application in the newly proposed system.
A relatively new lawmaker, Taiye Franco, a rising star, is proposing a different idea. Franco wants to keep the current domain system but change how it’s run. She proposes to limit how long any one individual can own a domain name. In its current form, a domain owner would have to give up their domain name to the next available suitor after every five years.
The only entities who would be eligible to keep a domain name longer than five years would be government registered C and S corporations that pay less than 0.5% of their yearly revenue in taxes. Franco says this is to make things fair, especially for smaller businesses.
According to Franco, “if a corporation cannot afford to pay us more than 0.5% of their revenue in taxes, it only seems fair that we should give them the best chance possible to compete against smaller business owners who most often will never fully utilize the true power of a domain name.”
Beyond the major proposals of Ahmed and Franco, there’s also a less popular idea that sometimes surfaces in the conversation: have the government control all domain names. This way, the government can fairly distribute and track domain names based on individual identification numbers and monitor the contents that exist within each domain name.
As the proposals are debated, let us know what you expect to be the outcome of the discussions. Do you expect that the lawmakers will reach a decision? Will their decision affect everyone who uses the internet or just the individuals with long necks and an even longer lifespan? In the worst case scenario, do you think that the internet would be cancelled? Let us know in the comments!!
About:
This story was last updated on June 3, 2025 to reflect changes in the conversation.
