Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)

    Minor Memos Domain Names Once Again Fetch Top Dollar
    posted by tbyfield on Saturday December 27 2003, @02:54PM

    dmehus writes "According to The Associated Press, domain names are once again fetching top dollar."

    "AP reporter Anick Jesdanun writes that a domain name squatter named Rick Schwartz, who owns more than 4,000 domain names, sold men.com for $1.3 million. Schwartz originally paid $15,000 for it, representing a handsome premium. Jesdanun goes onto explain what most ICANNWatchers knew already: after the dot-com bust in late 2000 and early 2001, domain name resale prices collapsed to rock-bottom clearance levels. However, if this most recent sale is any indication, things may be picking up.

    It also segways nicely into the point that we need new generic Top-Level Domains to avoid the kind of domain name hoarding and astronomical prices we saw in the late 1990s. Let's hope ICANN is listening."

      ICANNWatch Login  


    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

      Related Links  
    · ICANN
    · The Associated Press
    · fetching top dollar
    · More Minor Memos stories
    · Also by tbyfield
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Domain Names Once Again Fetch Top Dollar | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 46 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    by cambler (chris@ambler.net) on Sunday December 28 2003, @09:37AM (#12778)
    User #36 Info | http://onthenet.ambler.net/
    You hit the point, I think. To avoid the hording issue, you need to add around 50 to 60 new TLDs.

    There were 47 applicants in 2000. Had all been approved, the problem very well might have been resolved.

    I believe there could very easily be 60+ applicants in the next open round if ICANN implements an objective process rather than an insiders-club beauty contest.

    An ironic position coming from me, I think, since I want to compete with .Web - but I welcome robust competition. I'd much rather see the artificial scarcity done-away-with.

    Ambler On The Net [ambler.net]

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    by KarlAuerbach on Sunday December 28 2003, @12:31PM (#12781)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    Your exchange with Chris Ambler seems to conceive that the number of new TLDs that might be added would be on the order of one hundred or less.

    In reality the domain name system can easily accomodate several millions of new top level domains. (I know this from actual experiments - the largest problem that occurs is the increased risk of human errors, a problem that can be minimized through procedural overlays similar to those used by Verisign with respect to the .com zone.)

    Any speculator who wants to hoard a name across millions of TLDs had better have a healthy pocketbook.

    ICANN and its silent partner, the US Department of Commerce, have very clearly harmed the internet and the community of internet users by restricting new TLDs on the basis of completely irrelevant and arbitrary pseudo-criteria that serve no role except to benefit ICANN's intrenched interests.

    In any event, why debate the issue, let's simply build a fire under ICANN to create, say one TLD per day - in 10 years that would only be 3,650, a paltry number but probably big enough to give some indication of what it would do to speculation.

    It is very sad that ICANN's behaviour over the last 5 years has caused .com to bloat, thus creating a lock-in situation that limits the ability of those who have invested in building their brands in .com from moving those names to other TLDs.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    by ldg on Sunday December 28 2003, @02:58PM (#12783)
    User #2935 Info | http://example.com/
    One way to at least reduce the wholesale hoarding of domain names is for a registry to limit registrations to maybe one per minute from any given IP address, or even one per five minutes with no bulk registrations. To take it even further, each registrant could be limited to a set maximum number of domains in a given TLD (criteria might be a combination of name, address, and/or other identifying information). For a speculator, it's a real PITA to have to go through the routine of registering each name and input all the information every time, including credit card numbers, etc.

    Of course, that means the registry will not make money as fast either, so not too many would be willing to place those limitations. Just a thought. The cost of operating a decent registry with customer service can easily make restrictions like these not feasible, but they are possible.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    by KarlAuerbach on Sunday December 28 2003, @08:18PM (#12786)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    I don't want to try to stop hoarding by those who think domain names are good investments.

    What I *do* want to do is to create a system in which ICANN's groundless limitations on the expansion on the number of TLDs are removed.

    Once we begin allocating TLD operating rights to anyone who demonstrates an ability and willingness to meet *technical* DNS and protocol standards, then my belief is that there will be few who will continue to believe that domain names are a good investment.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Destroy Value of DNS = Lower Resale Prices
    by dmehus on Monday December 29 2003, @07:29AM (#12788)
    User #3626 Info | http://doug.mehus.info/
    I'm not going to reply to every point in your post; however, notice I used "domain squatter"? People have said "cyber squatter" implies someone who buys domain names and hoards them that infringe on existing trademarks. So, I chose to use "domain squatter," which by my definition is someone who buys a domain name (usually many of them at a time), sits his or her fat ass on it, and does nothing with it except partner with an existing domain name search traffic site [domainsponsor.com] in the hopes of profiting from it before selling it to some poor soul at astronomical prices. I equate this practice, regardless if legal trademarks or otherwise are infringed, to selling a jalopy to some ignorant (as in the uninformed and gullible) bugger for several hundred thousand dollars when it's really only worth $750. It's ethically and morally wrong. Could you honestly do that? I know my conscience would not allow me to do it.

    All the best,
    Doug Mehus http://doug.mehus.info/ [mehus.info]
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:

    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com