10 Sponsored TLDs Proposed
Date: Saturday March 20 2004, @07:59AM
Topic: sTLDs hoping to enter legacy root

cambler writes "10 proposals (including 2 for .tel). They've not posted the actual applications yet, so there's no way to make a judgement call. But let's presume that they're all of acceptable quality. With the exception of .tel, what I'd really like to see is ICANN say, "If you meet the technical and business criteria, you're in." .Tel might be problematic, but is a special case at this point.

Let the beauty contest begin?"

and MultiReg writes "Ten organizations submitted applications to sponsor new top level domains, including ".mobi" for mobile services and ".xxx" for adult content. Each organization paid $45,000 to apply for domain extensions that are ment for specific industries and interest groups. The new domain extensions will probably be approved later this year. Read the press release at http://www.multireg.com/article389.html"

[Editor's note: I'll be creating a new category for the sTLD applications as soon as I get a small site bug ironed out... -mf]

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
10 Sponsored TLDs Proposed | 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
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 a tepid bunch of new TLD applicants
by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday March 22 2004, @01:43PM (#13239)
User #2810 Info
I suppose some of this is due to the fact that this application round (and I suspect most all future rounds, assuming there are any) is restricted to sponsored gTLDs but still... Did the MdR2k round go that badly that few still want to try? ICANN must be choked that they're not getting a similar windfall to last time, so I bet we won't see any rebate, and I suspect they will OK most of the applicants so they can at least make money from future registration fees.

Aside from that, my first impressions are that .mail looks interesting as an anti-spam tool, as will be who gets .tel (unless ICANN does a Solomon like they did with .web, but like I say they'd probably prefer more cashflow). And this just goes to show that there should be some sort of taxonomy to TLD strings (and I know I am in a small minority with that opinion), whichever of these TLD strings are approved will just further confuse the end user. -g

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:You And Your Customers
by KarlAuerbach on Saturday March 20 2004, @01:17PM (#13222)
User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
I agree with Chris except that I would shorten his statement: "If you meet the technical and business criteria, you're in." to simply "If you meet the technical criteria, you're in."

In other words, there ought to be no "business criteria" - It is simply none of ICANN's concern, nor ours as members of the community of internet users, what someone's great or silly business plan might be.

TLDs are not airplanes - if a TLD crashes there are no innocents who are hurt, at least not if the buyers of names in that TLD are adequately informed by the TLD operator about what they are buying. And I'd leave that to existing consumer protection and other laws that deal with fraudulent practices and the scope of warranties.

ICANN has created the glamour that TLDs are something special that have to be evaluated and deliberated carefully. That always has been nonsense - but it is a glamour that does bring in a lot of revenue to a cash-starved ICANN.

In reality, one should be able to obtain a TLD with about the same degree of effort and cost as getting a license to drive an 18 wheel truck - in other words, it would involve some scrutiny of skills and some small license cost (measured in tens or hundreds of dollars, not tens of thousands of dollars.) It would involve no deep background checks nor inquiries into the motivation or finances.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Re:You And Your Customers
by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Sunday March 21 2004, @10:45AM (#13229)
User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
I don't think it's really fair to refer to .name as a "loser" -- true, it hasn't caught on to a large extent, but at least it actually did launch (unlike .pro), and is being used by some, including myself. A Google search [google.com] turns up 80,700 indexed pages in the .name domain, which is more than Google has for .aero, .coop, or .museum.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • This article comes from ICANNWatch

    The URL for this story is: