Domain Names |
Sponsored by |
While the global rollout of DNSSEC continues at the domain name registry level - with more than 25% of top-level domains now signed - the industry continues to focus on the problem of registrar, ISP and ultimately end-user adoption. At the ICANN meeting in Dakar in late October, engineers from some of the early-adopting registries gathered for their regular face-to-face discussion about how to break the "chicken or egg" problems of secure domain name deployment.
The word gTLD has been added to the hardcore lexicon of global branding. Why is this new spin causing vertigo to some? Before you say anything else like 'what'? Just hold on. It makes no difference whether you already are an expert on gTLD or not. The fact is it's in your face and we all have to deal with it for a long time, so deal with it. On the internet today, from around the world, there are over 10,000 articles on ICANN's gTLD...
In connection with the recent publication of the IANA RFP, there have been some commenters that have proclaimed that removing the requirement of the Contractor to document the consensus of relevant stakeholders in connection with the delegation of new gTLDs from the original draft Statement of Work as a win for ICANN. However, when reading the recently revised IANA RFP language in light of the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) Dakar Communiqué, a rather compelling legal case can be made...
Last year I wrote a post right after Thanksgiving entitled: "While You Were Eating You're Turkey Homeland Security Was Seizing 9 Domains". Well I could have repeated the headline today except the number would be 131 domains rather than just 9. Looks like Homeland Security is going to make domain seizures on Thanksgiving as common in the US as Turkey and Stuffing.
One thing that ICANN clearly lacks is a set of well documented and often referenced founding principles. This leaves the awkward position where everyone who has been around since the beginning has a different position on what those principles should have been and all those that have joined later know that there is something fundamental missing. The missing principle vexing me this week is that of fair competition. Even now, long after the gTLD vote, the argument still runs on...
"There is a serious danger that ICM will establish and monopolize such a distinct market. As consumers seeking adult content become more aware of the .XXX TLD, registering and displaying websites in other generic TLDs may not easily be substituted for registration in the .XXX TLD." No that statement is not from the ICM Registry's sales material.
While Occupy Wall Street and other groups representing the so-called 99% are getting most of the press, the 1% is raising its profile as well, at least when it comes to gTLDs. They are complaining that introducing global choice and competition to the Internet will cost them money. The chief of the Association of National Advertisers (ANA) now says that it has "spent the last few months" considering the new gTLD program, and has found it lacking. They want ICANN to shut the whole thing down.
In a move that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, the EU Commission has given a rather mixed welcome to the IANA bid. While they obviously like a lot of what they are seeing, they're also not overly impressed with the contract only being open to US companies.
In politics, as in Internet policy, the most effective weapons are also the oldest. So when it came time for hard-line intellectual property advocates to make a desperate last stand against the new gTLD program, it came as no surprise they turned to the atomic bomb of rhetorical devices: FUD. FUD stands for "fear, uncertainty and doubt" and it is the tool of last resort when change is coming and you want to stop it. The theory is simple: the human response to fear is to cling to what's familiar and oppose what's new. So if you can scare enough people about the potential effects of a new policy or law, you stand a pretty good chance of preventing it from ever going into effect.
The growing notion among big advertising agencies and brand marketers is that as search engines find answers instantly, there's no real need to enter a domain name in the browser and therefore domain names are far less important. They're absolutely right. Why would you type www.rolex.com when you can simply enter 'Rolex' and be there before you blink? But where they are seriously wrong is when you enter anything like 'Interlink', 'Pronet', 'National Trust', 'Premier Traders' or 'United Manufacturing', uncontrollable citations will gush out from every corners of the world.