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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
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)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Groundbreaking NAF Decision in NEW.NET Domain Case | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 86 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    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.
    Re: Decision now available on http://www.steinle.l
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday September 02 2002, @08:39PM (#8937)
    User #2810 Info
    Simon writes
    Yes. But it takes money to distribute this plug-in. That is the point: You could start a .pro but you wouldn't have the money to distribute your plug-in or to form ISP partnerships.
    It doesn't cost money to distribute a plugin. Just because new.net pays money to get distributed as foistware doesn't mean it's the only way to distribute a plugin. I happen to think new.net has done some things right and some things wrong. That was one of the wrong ones. And it has nothing to do with forming ISP partnerships, that's more new.net thinking (not that they distribute a plugin that way, which was what I was talking about). Such ISP parnering may have been a good decision (I don't know what it cost them), but how long will those partnerships last, and at what cost? I don't think much longer. Then where is new.net?
    I only wanted to say that you could start your own .pro but this would not change coverage in any way. If you register with both registries you would get at least 99% coverage. With the USG, ORSC and the PacificRoot you should cover nearly 100%.
    With the USG you cover nearly 100% so why use another. I've used ORSC since before new.net existed and there's just not much unique content there that isn't available via the USG. I also used the new.net plugin for the first year of their existence and never had occasion to use it other than for testing. Sorry, I'd prefer to see ORSC and even new.net be successful as it would cramp ICANN's style, but if I see no particular success in alt-roots, Jane and Joe Average sure won't.
    users:
    users don't have to change their DNS settings to browse .pro domains
    Oh really? So there won't be any colliders? So every *.*.pro in the USG root will be no different than those in the nic.pro root? Then what's the point?
    registrants:
    they get near 100% coverage --> e.g. better ROI on advertising campagnes
    I've yet to see any advertising campaigns for any alt-root sites. I don't see why that makes for a selling feature. The USG root already gets near 100% coverage, and if you understand real marketing at all, that's plenty.
    nic.pro registry:
    that is your problem, if you don't see the opportunities to make money with this concept. i wouldn't need registration fees.
    Well, I obviously misunderstood when you said you weren't charging for the names. From your site here I see that:
    Imagine you were the registrant of the Original domain sex.med.pro or business.law.pro. You could get up to 10% of the traffic of the domain sex.med.pro or business.law.pro from RegistryPro!
    So, either you're giving away your version of sex.med.pro to mess with the subsequent USG one for some reason, or you're selling (as it is a name.space frontend I expect it pays you to do so) it to some potential speculator (and probable squatter), and it's not transferable via the UDRP (though it probably is via other methods). It doesn't matter if the first site doesn't actually get that 10% traffic (which it won't, that is an absurd figure), or even if the first name is operational. Squatters will expect they can shake down the second *.*.pro for a few dollars profit, and even if they don't turn out successful at that (and I don't see most paying the extortion, they can safely ignore it), then you've still made your money and can't be held responsible. A neat trick, perhaps ironically not so unlike that which the TM registrant of sex.shop was trying on you, and which you can now use as an advertising vehicle. And I don't expect it to work any better for you than it did for him. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Decision now available on http://www.steinle.l by fnord
    Re: Decision now available on http://www.steinle.l
    by simon on Tuesday September 03 2002, @12:49AM (#8942)
    User #2982 Info | http://www.nic.pro/
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    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