If the proposal is accepted by ICANN's board then almost any extension that is 64 characters or less could be used
The exact price to register these new names isn't yet known, but some experts predict it could cost about $50,000 to register a new domain name.
What?
That means I could have www.zuko.zukorocks. Any extension that I wanted for the low low price of $50k.
eg. [microsoft...]
As far as I know, no. Even though technically it is definitely not a problem (minus the issue of browsers automatically performing a search or some sort of auto-completion, and ditto for resolver libraries), here people will be applying to operate a gTLD as a registry. I'm quite certain the contract between ICANN and the registry will force them to actually provide sub-domains and not use the TLD itself as a single domain for their own use.
Jacques.
must not be able to be confused with any existing one
I beg to differ that "having standards" will eliminate problems in an area as complex as human language - in its many variations - as applied to a system designed to resolve web traffic - across the borders of some 200+/- countries and an even greater number of languages.
We already have the classic .Com vs. the .Cm ccTLD (Cameroon?) "Com-edy of typographical errors", whereby accidentally omitting the "O" in .Com leads one to nifty .Cm registry generated landing pages filled with PPC ads. Of course this isn't ICANN's "fault", but is it an example of things to come with the expanding gTLDs? Did anyone in charge, anywhere, observe the likelihood of confusion between .Com and .Cm and - if so - why didn't someone, somewhere "just say no"? Was that even possible? If not, why not? If not, is that an indication of "more of the same to come"?
What happens when letters form words with different meanings in different languages? Does an American's "confusion" trump an Elbonian's "plain meaning"?
What happens when a the letters of a proposed gTLD "sound like" (form sounds / phonemes) a word that has an entirely different meanings in another country?
Who is going to say "No! You cannot offer "that" as a gTLD because . . in English . . those letters form a word that sounds like "(word)" . . and that's obscene . . and it doesn't matter that in (your language) the word is a common word for (whatever)!"
Which language or nation wins that battle? Is different meanings in different languages "confusion"?
I wish I could borrow the mind of DigitalGhost for awhile because I'm certain he could offer a number of quick lessons in how this "good idea" by ICANN will quickly create all manner of chaos and conflict.
If ICANN continues to endorse the idea of "unlimited gTLDs" (sure, with restrictions) the evolution of this idea will certainly be fun to watch. Frankly, my gut tells me that this is an idea that will soon show its propensity to drive conflict and confusion all by itself - without getting to the stage of "applied bright idea".
[edited by: Webwork at 6:11 pm (utc) on June 25, 2008]
Perhaps.
To take a topic that was 99% negative and turn it around after one reply. Ah, strategy at work...
In the early days a simple top-level hierarchy, then expanded so that almost anything goes.
In the early days, easy to find something using a logical drill-down.
Nowadays, not a hope in hell.
Me thinks jcaron just performed some true "Reputation Management". To take a topic that was 99% negative and turn it around after one reply. Ah, strategy at work...
jcaron didn't exactly turn my opinion. It might not be as bad as this discussion has lived it up to be, but "unlimited" gTLDs are a bad idea. Period.
Icann should be scrapped. The only thing they are interested in is making more money. Icann should be replaced with an international body where countries need to agree on changes together - hopefully stopping absurd ideas like this.
Amen. Moreover,I don't see anything that tells me there will be a "rush" for this new concept; and BTW, who's minding the mint, pray tell should it actually fly .. ?
The company seeking .X XX for example is still pursuing ICANN. Earlier this month they announced they are still seeking to challenge ICANN's ruling against .X XX. They intend to use ICANN's Articles of incorporation by filing an "Independent Review Process" against ICANN with the ICDR (International Centre for Dispute Resolution)
