Department of Commerce questioning ICANN's gTLD Intent

[Gerry]

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2008/ICANN_081218.pdf

The US Department of Commerce is concerned about the rationality of ICANN's proposal to just about let anything get into the gTLD realm.

The US Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration sent a letter to ICANN expresses concerns regarding the proposed introduction of new TLDs and if they are even necessary to begin with.

[DNBA]

awesome im glad that they are saying something. gTLDs are a total waist. not to mention will put a dent in our industry.

[draggar]

They're not a waste, they'll pay for ICANN's executives new cars, houses, etc..

[jdk]

They're not a waste, they'll pay for ICANN's executives new cars, houses, etc..

That is something that needs to be addressed. Increasing fees to pay for stuff like that.

[Gerry]

They're not a waste, they'll pay for ICANN's executives new cars, houses, etc..

Not to mention their new chateaus now that they are fleeing to Switzerland to escape prosecution here in the US over the Registry Fly debacle.

[domaingenius]

Not to mention their new chateaus now that they are fleeing to Switzerland to escape prosecution here in the US over the Registry Fly debacle.

What exactly is alleged to have happened in this regard, did the recipient
of the domains pay ICANN a backhander or something ?.

DG

[Gerry]

What exactly is alleged to have happened in this regard, did the recipient
of the domains pay ICANN a backhander or something ?.

DG

It has been awhile. But documents were turned over showing that ICANN knew about the improprieties going on within the hierarchy of RegFly for at least a year prior to the RegFly insolvency.

Plus, RegFly (if I recall correctly) were a boatload of money behind in paying ICANN. Yet, ICANN knowing all this allowed things to go on as business as usual.

[draggar]

Didn't many of their customers lose their domains & sites (who had them hosted w/ RegFly)?

I started to get into domaining when that whole fiasco started.

[Acro]

I brought forth these gaping holes in the process a long time ago. Specifically, the lack of any due process to deliver trademark-infringing TLD's via the auction method. Adobe wrote a very strong letter to ICANN emphasizing the logistical nightmare of protecting their valuable marks across an ocean of new TLD's. ICANN needs to be pressed further and its board of directors must be scrutinized for any potential direct benefits from this "brilliant" idea.

[namestrands]

I thought ICANN was run by a shell company of Haliburton

[Gerry]

I thought ICANN was run by a shell company of Haliburton

Is Haliburton AKA Verisign?

Wow, this may go deeper than we thought!

[CureCancer]

Its about time! All these tlds flooding our world wide web is making some group of people RICH!

[Gerry]

I will try to find the article I read about the ICANN Cairo meeting.

There was quite a bit of concern expressed over the proposed gcTLD's and gTLD's from many concerned participants from many nations.

[carlton]

Here's some interesting perspective from CircleID on ICANN's larger than life ego ...

http://www.circleid.com/posts/200812...cann_tld_plan/

[Gerry]

Other interesting points of view:

Microsoft, Time Warner, Others Weigh In On New TLDs

Here are some of the comments:

Microsoft: As a practical matter, Microsoft objects to the introduction of new ASCII gTLDs for several reasons. History suggests that the introduction of new ASCII gTLDs will not result in true competition…the introduction of potentially hundreds of new ASCII gTLDs is far more likely to threaten the security and stability of the Internet as a commercial platform than to ensure it.

Time Warner: ICANN needs to examine seriously for whose benefit the proposed new gTLD round is being launched. If it is truly for the benefit of the “next billion” Internet users around the globe, then the launch should focus on IDN TLDs to serve populations that have historically been excluded from full participation in the Internet in their native tongues. If after the launch of new IDN TLDs ICANN can demonstrate that there remains a strong need for additional gTLDs, only then should it consider the launch of such extensions.

US Chamber of Commerce: The new gTLD program will introduce significant threats to businesses and consumers without clear evidence of counterbalancing benefits…ICANN has provided little persuasive evidence that establishment of additional gTLDs will provide competition against .com addresses.

Internet Commerce Association: The new gTLD process must not be used to resurrect much less validate the concept of differential pricing by registries; any exceptions to this policy must only be for a carefully circumscribed group of “closed” registries subject to strict numerical registration limits.

Bank of America: We strongly believe that ICANN is proceeding too hastily to enable the unlimited expansion of new generic Top Level Domain names…We do not believe there is significant demand from businesses or consumers for additional gTLDs to host commercial sites. The dot com gTLD is the preeminent top level domain in the world. No other commercially-oriented domain comes close to dot com in popularity, whether measured by the number of registered domain names or by the amount of user traffic.


Transcript Cairo public forum, 6 November 2008

ICAAN's Cairo open public forum.

Many questions, internationally, and some of you may find this interesting:

>> PAUL STAHURA: I am Paul Stahura, the founder of eNOM. And I have four brief points about new TLDs. Number one, many of you know me, and that I've been waiting ten years to operate a TLD. So you know I will be an applicant. And I'm also a backend provider for more applications. Number two, we think the RFP is a strong and well-prepared document. It reflects more than 18 months of community input and discussion. It's 98% of the way there. Number three, our applications will respect and protect I.P. rights. Number four, our biggest concern is that the application window slips past Q2, 2009. Subsequent to the Paris meeting, global business and community awareness and interest is very high. There are many backend providers like eNOM spreading the word. So we, the Internet community, have done a great job to get applicants back to the starting line. Our engines are running. Don't let us run out of gas before you start the race. Open the application window in Q2, 2009. Thank you.

Superb article here:
http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/low...s/12-16-08.htm

Major trademark holders and national advertisers are calling on ICANN to stop, or at least slow down, its plan to roll out an unlimited number of new global TLDs in 2009.

Broadcast & Cable magazine reported that the Association of National Advertisers (ANA), in a letter to ICANN CEO Dr. Paul Twomey, called the proposal premature and counterproductive. ANA represents 9,000 brands that spend $100 billion annually on advertsing and marketing.

[DNWizardX9]

kinda ironic since namejet (enom) sends me TM emails

[Rubber Duck]

What is going down here is the gTLD expansion that was put on the table as a sop to the ASCII crowd so that IDN gTLDs could be introduce into the Root is now being pulled back off the table to satisfy the same fractious crowd.

No matter, IDN will now be put at the top of the agenda and the pressure will be on to Alias the domains in the existing extensions rather to introduce the "Real IDN" that everyone has been hanging on for. Do you really now believe that the DOC is going to sanction dot com look alikes in over 100 different languages?

[Gerry]

No matter, IDN will now be put at the top of the agenda

I agree. The viability and demand for IDN is too great to be ignored.

We are looking at the making of a very contentious and fractured internet.

[Acro]

If it were up to me, it'd be just com/net/org

[DNWizardX9]

Lets scrap IDNs