I ran into a Reuters headline today, which illustrated to me the pace at which some legislative bodies operate.

Yes, this .kids idea is timely. It is an idea so good, that I remember multiple different bidders proposing it in the initial wave of new TLDs laid in front of ICANN back in 2000.

The contenders all had fantastic presentations and capabilities, which I heard voiced in the Marina Del Rey ICANN meetings as the 44 initial proposals were culled into seventeen, and then into the seven (.aero,.biz,.coop,.info,museum,.name,.pro) we know today, during what I would call an extremely organic selection process that the ICANN board referred to as ‘the cart’.

Ultimately, .kids didn’t make it into final 17 due to the technical requirements of the time on registry operations, and ultimately never found its way into ‘the cart’ that fateful day.

Instead, it got rolled up into a second level extension under .us, as .kids.us through legislation hoping to push ICANN into the creation of the .kids TLD (HR 2417). (STORY). We’ve yet to see that namespace really take shape from community adoption (unfortunately).

Five years later, now that the EU has gotten so close to their .EU TLD “European Parliament proposes .kid Internet domain”

This EU proposal could benefit from all of the existing momentum and history, but here is an opportunity we have not had in the new TLD process…

What happens when a governmental interest overrides private entities in the TLD selection process? This should be very carefully considered in moving forward.

I also need to comment about agility here. After watching the policy development for the .EU happen, and seeing where we are at in the timeline on this momentous TLD, I would really strongly question if the EU could handle the pace and responsiveness to effectively administrate such a TLD as .kids.

If indeed it is time for a .kids TLD, get in line for the next window of proposals, and give those first applicants from 2000 some first-mover advantage.