As you may know, there are generally two approaches to resolve a domain name dispute: one is to take file a civil action with a …
I find the illustration of misunderstanding/mis-translation to the new promulgation of Declaration on China’s Domain Name System in Rebecca’s Blog. It is really funny in that some foreigners seem always interested in the censorship issues and this make them used to burst out "alarmists".
It is a matter of FACT that Chinese Gov will not relieve its censorship policy tomorrow morning. However, there is another FACT in that, at least up to now, this censorship is mainly technical but not legislatorial (for example, the gov dose not impose the installation of application that can identificate the ".公司" names). And even when some really questionalble regulations are promulgated (of course not including this one as Rebecca has clarified in her post), it is another matter of FACT in that the enforcement of these regulations are often not as effeciently as what those observers, who may live in a country under the rule of law, would anticipate. (sorry I will not take examples here).
Another important information from Rebecca’s entry is that CNNIC did not actually use any alternative/parellel root.
我前几天就知道了ICANN委员会否决“.XXX”类别域名的消息，本来也没什么好奇怪的——关于“.XXX”的好处和坏处，赞同者和反对者各执一词，所依据的价值原点又可以有多个，所以很难判定究竟是采用还是不采用这个类别域名好——由于我国到目前为止，对于成人信息的管制还处于十分初级的阶段，甚至没有建立起基本的分级制度，仅仅非常概括和粗暴地禁止“淫秽信息”的存在，所以估计“.XXX”即使真能设立，也会随即被全部列入“网络长城”的过滤范围。