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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    ICANN's Creation of more sponsored TLDs | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 27 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: Please, No More TLDs...
    by Anonymous on Saturday December 07 2002, @04:30AM (#10453)
    "a new gTLD like .WEB would just be a repeat of .NET"

    Verisign has no motivation to influence or promote participation with .NET, especially away from .COM. It's a lame duck contract. They would only be assisting today some future competitor tomorrow....not a real wise allocation of resources.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Please, No More TLDs...
    by Anonymous on Saturday December 07 2002, @06:53AM (#10457)
    Thankfully, you're not in charge of competition laws. You're obviously also not an economist.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Yours is that specious argument, yet again.
    by Anonymous on Saturday December 07 2002, @07:36AM (#10459)

    Another nonsensical call for the deletion of current .WEB registrations. If IOD is approved as the .WEB registry for the Legacy root, and the .WEB registrations currently in existence are cancelled, that would be a breach of contract between IOD and its registrants. Quite illegal.

    Furthermore, ICANN cannot demand such an erasure of the databases for ICANN is not the vendor. IOD is. They simply do not function as the wholesaler. They function merely as the so-called technical gatekeeper.

    Additionally, your claim that .WEB registrants have registered their .WEB domains for resale is unsubstantiated. You have no evidence, except for two or three registrants that have put up a for sale sign in the whois. This represents an insignificant number if you've ever gone through the databases, and not exactly the most coveted names.

    Which registrants are speculating? Which are not? Do you delete everyone from the registry because a percentage are speculators? Are you willing to do that with .COM, .NET, .ORG, .TV, .CC, .INFO, .BIZ, .US, etc?

    Furthermore, even if every IOD registrant is indeed a speculator, there is no law or policy against such activity either in the gTLD industry or in others. So any database wipe done on the grounds of the preemption of speculation would be, again, quite illegal.

    Do you really think that .WEB WON'T be a TLD with speculators if the database as it currently stands is deleted? At least the original registrants registered with the awareness that there was not a 100 percent guarantee that IOD would be approved. If a clean .WEB registry was opened up, there would be far more speculators jumping on board than had jumped on board in 1996.

    When .WEB was opened up in 1996, speculators, as such, were not really an issue in the domain market. Hence, the original .WEB registrants are less likely to be speculators than any registrants that come along hereafter. Business.COM didn't sell until 1999. Prior to that, speculation wasn't much of a concept.

    Seems to me there is a greater collection of legitimate registrations in existence right now than would be represented by any new nameholders for the already-registered .WEB domains.

    But what do you care of any of this? You want to get your hands on your choice .WEB domains so you can sell them yourself.

    Incidentally, your notion of "an official TLD" is flawed. Is a TLD any less legitimate just because it is not in the Legacy root? Is a private business less legitimate than one sponsored by the government? .WEB already exists in a root. The infrastructure of the registry exists. The domains of that registry are available in an existing root system. Now it's simply a matter of enabling the Legacy root to resolve those names as well.






    [ 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