|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 04:09:30PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote: > Two years ago I posed the question here about the need for TLDs > (http://www.mcabee.org/lists/nanog/May-06/msg00110.html). I > summerizsed that companies IP (Intellectual Property) guidelines > would never allow domain.org to exist if they owned domain.com > (ibm.org vrs ibm.com). I felt that TLDs really represented a monetary > harvesting scheme as every new TLD forced companies to "pay for > yet another domain name" (slowly milking businesses). At that time > several knowledgeable folks commented that TLDs were necessary in the > beginning due to the need to distribute queries. Now it seems, ICANN > has decided to add a new paradigm :-) How will a TLD like .ibm be > handled now, and how is this different than what I proposed in 2006? Could someone point me to a reference (other than a very poorly written BBC article) that suggests that .ibm is even a valid possiblity in light of whatever ICANN actually *is* proposing? And no, companies *aren't* "forced to pay for another domain name" just because a new TLD appears -- they aren't doing it *now*, by and large, and thank ghod: a) it doesn't constitute a violation of Ford Motor's trademark that the Ford Foundation has ford.org or a Mustang club has ford.net and b) it's horrible DNS hygiene to do that in the first place; it re-flattens the TLD namespace. I certainly advise my clients not to do things that foolish. I'm sure Randy encourages me in this. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink [email protected] Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274 Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin)
|