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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    Keith Teare's Iconoclastic Take on the SiteFinder Report | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 21 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.
    What about the PROMISES .BIZ made about USAGE ?
    by Anonymous on Monday July 26 2004, @04:37AM (#14033)
    What about the PROMISES .BIZ made about USAGE ?

    What happened to the contractual promises .BIZ
    made about owners being required to put their .BIZ names into a BUSINESS use ?

    Where is the ENFORCEMENT of the ICANN contracts ?

    Is the .BIZ Registry in default on those contracts ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    .BIZ can NOT be like .COM, .BIZ promised not to be
    by Anonymous on Monday July 26 2004, @04:49AM (#14034)
    .BIZ can not be like .COM because JVTeam (Neustar)
    claimed "such a space currently is lacking".

    If .BIZ is just like .COM, then .BIZ is not
    needed.


    http://www.icann.org/tlds/biz4/TLDPolicyPropbiz.ht m
    [icann.org]
    ===================
    I.2 TLD String (RFP Section E2)

    JVTeam proposes to establish .biz as a domain space on the Internet for commercial use. Such a space currently is lacking.

    JVTeam proposes to offer registry services for the .biz TLD as an unsponsored, restricted TLD. .biz domain names will be offered for registration by businesses for commercial uses only and not for personal use. The TLD shall be restricted to any individual, organization, or entity that desires to advertise their business and/or conduct commercial activities on the Internet.

    As an additional value added service, JVTeam proposes to offer the option for these businesses to elect to register certain information with a participating ICANN-accredited registrar to allow registrars to create business directories for consumers to easier locate the registrant on the Internet. Such information may include, but is not limited to, a description of the business, its corresponding SIC code, the number of employees, the location of the headquarters, etc. This opt-in information will be stored by the JVTeam in a file that will be made available to the public at no fee. It is envisioned that such information will be compiled by entrepreneurial businesses that will repackage and add to the information in new and innovative ways to provide a value-added offering of their own.

    These innovative uses will provide for an excellent “proof of concept” for new functionality and address currently unmet needs using the DNS.
    =================== .BIZ was claimed to be a "proof of concept".
    It appears nothing was proved. The experiment
    has failed.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    "Registrants will be required to certify" ???
    by Anonymous on Monday July 26 2004, @04:55AM (#14035)

    http://www.icann.org/tlds/biz4/TLDPolicyPropbiz.ht m
    [icann.org]

    III. REGISTRATION RESTRICTIONS (Required for restricted TLDs only) (RFP Sections E16-E21)

    JVTeam intends to establish a purely commercial and business TLD. The need for a purely commercial space on the Internet is clear. Despite the existence of numerous TLDs on the Internet presently, none operate in a truly commercial manner that are available for consumers to easily navigate the World Wide Web to locate legitimate businesses and entities.

    Despite the existence of numerous TLDs on the Internet, it remains difficult, if not impossible, for consumers to locate legitimate businesses on the Internet. When initially developed, the .com TLD was designed for commercial use only. However, because of the fact that there was never any enforcement of the commercial nature of .com, either on the front-end through representations or verifications, or on the back-end through dispute resolution, the commercial requirement for .com was dropped. As a result, even though many entities were successful in registering their business name as a .com, an even larger number of trademark, service mark, trade name, and business owners were forced to adopt domain names that may be similar, but not identical, to their mark or name. In addition, many of the desired commercial domain names have been adopted by persons or entities using the mark for personal, political or other noncommercial purposes. There currently exists no place on the Internet for entirely commercial domain names. The lack of such a space limits legitimate e-commerce and often times creates consumer confusion with respect to use of the Internet. Absent such a commercial space, users of the Internet are forced to weed through countless personal, noncommercial, or even non-used Websites, to locate the information they need.
    Describe in detail the criteria for registration in the TLD. Provide a full explanation of the reasoning behind the specific policies chosen.

    JVTeam proposes .biz as a restricted TLD. Only businesses and entities desiring to use the domain name for legitimate business and commercial purposes may register domain names in .biz. This restriction forms the core policy for .biz.

    The need to keep individual personal uses out of .biz is apparent. For the reasons set forth above, a purely commercial TLD will provide a forum for businesses to advertise and conduct their business on the Internet in such a manner that make it easier for consumers to locate them. To avoid the prospect of the .biz TLD becoming a generic unrestricted TLD, like .com, where personal noncommercial uses of the domain names are permitted, such registrations will not be allowed.

    Registrants will be required to certify that the name chosen is reasonably related to the business of the registrant. Violation of this principle (i.e., [company]stinks.biz likely would not be a commercial use) would be a violation of the TLD charter and could result in cancellation of the name by the registry pursuant to a UCDRP challenge.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    "require that registrars collect a certification"?
    by Anonymous on Monday July 26 2004, @04:58AM (#14036)

    http://www.icann.org/tlds/biz4/TLDPolicyPropbiz.ht m
    [icann.org]

    Describe the enforcement procedures and mechanisms for ensuring registrants meet the registration requirements.

    JVTeam will require that registrars collect a certification from the registrant that they are a business, that the name is reasonably related to the registrant’s business, and that the domain name will be used for commercial purposes only. This certification will form the basis for the deletion of a registered name through the UCDRP where necessary and a registration will not be made without a completed certification. JVTeam will not, however, deny initial registrations except for duplicate requests.
    ===

    Do the Registrars have such "certifications"
    for ALL .BIZ names ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The Marketplace Clearly Favors THIN over FAT
    by Anonymous on Monday July 26 2004, @05:15AM (#14037)
    The Marketplace Clearly Favors THIN over FAT .COM and .NET are both THIN. .BIZ is FAT
    Compare the total numbers. People do not want
    centralized (FAT) solutions. Registrars are
    more protected in a THIN approach. The Registrars
    sell .COM and .NET. The .BIZ FAT "concept" has not
    proven to be desirable. Regulators and
    governments may be fooled into thinking FAT
    is what they want, but consumers are not fooled.
    Consumers see right thru the centralized, FAT,
    heavy-handed regulation (accreditation)
    approach. Look at the Registrar and Reseller
    situation, there are many Resellers that are
    much larger than some of the Registrars who
    also just happen to be FAT-advocates.

    ICANN is FAT, the world prefers THIN.


    http://www.icann.org/tlds/biz4/TLDPolicyPropbiz.ht m
    [icann.org]

    "Concept to be proven: That the fat registry model will provide solutions to many of the existing administrative and security issues with .com.

    A competitive registry environment—The JVTeam registry will represent the next step forward in the evolution of TLD registry operations. The solution will draw on JVTeam’s extensive experience in database management, domain name services, channel management, registry and registrar experience, policy administration, and the provision of high transaction software and infrastructure. This unique skill set and experience enables the JVTeam to understand the existing issues in the single registry environment and innovate in all key areas including better adapted functionality, better service standards, increased reliability, effective marketing and business development. The result in all this for the consumer is the ability to choose a domain name backed up by a registry capable of delivering these improvements."
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    100% - 31% = 69% in Default of ICANN Contracts ?
    by Anonymous on Monday July 26 2004, @05:28AM (#14038)
    "In BIZ, 31% of all registered names resolve to discrete, websites with actual content."
    ==

    Are you saying that, for a start, 69% of the .BIZ customers are NOT in compliance with the
    ICANN contracts and the promises made by the .BIZ Registry operator ?

    Should ICANN appoint a .BIZ Registry Operator
    that *enforces* the lucrative financial contracts
    which were awarded based on promises made to
    the U.S. Government's designated agency, ICANN ?

    Should any other ICANN contracts be awarded to
    companies that do not **currently** enforce
    their existing contracts and stand behind the
    vast number of promises they made ?
    [ 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