ICANN Might Pre-Register gTLDs To Placate Critics 70
Posted
by
kdawson
from the i-think-i-can dept.
from the i-think-i-can dept.
judgecorp writes "ICANN is to be congratulated for succeeding in expanding the Internet beyond the Latin alphabet. However, the organization is facing a harder task in extending the Internet's global top-level domains (gTLDs) — its proposal to open up the gTLD space has been plagued by controversy and delays. INCANN faces struggles with trademark owners and competing businesses — but even so it is being criticized for acting slowly (as seen in transcripts from the recent meeting in Seoul). It now seems likely the body will have a pre-registration scheme to gauge demand and placate critics by getting something moving on new gTLDs."
So (Score:2, Interesting)
When will Slashdot move under .slashdot?
Re:So (Score:5, Interesting)
For that matter, Slashdot isn't really an organization, so why is it under .org?
Re:So (Score:1, Interesting)
Remember that a fully qualified domain name ends in another dot, so it would really be "slashdot.slashdot." or you could go with "slashdot.slash." or "slash.slash."
Nobody uses those anyways (Score:2, Interesting)
It isn't a .com(pany) either. It has nothing to do with .net(work related services).
Technically it should be slashdot.info but really, who cares? The gTLDs have lost their meaning and that is a good thing - it is impossible to moderate them well so it is better if people don't assume they should be given any attention.
Don't forget the 40 who are waiting from year 2000 (Score:4, Interesting)
There are 40 applicants who paid ICANN $50,000 each in year 2000 who ICANN has strung along all these years, neither granting nor denying. These include IOD's application for .web.
ICANN needs to deal with this leftover business from 9 years ago.
Re:Nobody uses those anyways (Score:3, Interesting)
That argument is pretty weak, is it better to remove all trafic lights so people don't assume it's safe to cross a junction?
ICANN has fucked up gTLDs and everything they do seams to make it worse, now im not saying they should go around taking domains back, but if they made sure decent rules were in place then a domain name might actually mean something.
Minimize trademark litigation: Auto-registration. (Score:4, Interesting)
Any existing 2nd-level domain registrant automatically gets assigned a new TLD equivalent to the current 2nd-level name minus the TLD suffix. Collision priority scheme is .edu, then .com, then .org and .net, then .gov, and finally .mil. Ignores ccTLDs.
First, take care of the .edu sites: Automatically register a new TLD for each registered .edu name, such the that new TLD is the 2nd-level part of the existing .edu name. For example, Harvard U. currently owns 'harvard.edu.', so they would automatically receive the new 'harvard.' TLD.
Second, it seems reasonable to assume that the .com names have higher visibility than the .net/.org names, but not quite as over-riding as the grant to the existing .edu holders. Autoregister the new TLD and give it to the .com holder, but allow a weighted bidding process if the current .net or .org holder wants to try to buy the rights: During some designated 6-month period before open TLD registration starts, the .org/.net holder puts a bid of X dolllars in trust, and the .com holder has 60 days to match 20% of X (single-round bid, weighted at 0.2). That weighting is pretty arbitrary--it doesn't really matter what the actual weight is.
Third, whatever's left in the TLD space gets assigned to .gov and .mil names, on the same basis as .edu.
It's not perfect--it totally ignores ccTLDs, and the weighting is arbitrary, and who am I to say that a .com name is more of a claim on the new TLD than a .net/.org name?
But do you think an unqualified, disorganized "land rush" would be somehow better? At least this way, you're limiting the number of trademark/squatting cases that have to be litigated.