A complete overhaul of the way in which people navigate the internet has been given the go-ahead in Paris.The net's regulator, Icann, voted unanimously to relax the strict rules on so-called "top-level" domain names, such as .com or .uk.
The decision means that companies could turn brands into web addresses, while individuals could use their names.
Here it goes, I am the first to post the news (hopefully)
This is kind of nuts. Big mistake.
[edited by: engine at 4:49 pm (utc) on June 26, 2008]
[edit reason] added quote [/edit]
Yeah, does anyone really do that?
If someone wants to buy a widget do they really start just typing different combinations of widget.TLD?
Maybe when they first use the internet, but as you say most people learn pretty quickly to go after trusted brands instead of generic domain names, especially when so many generic sites are nothing but banners.
The default ending that people put on a half-remembered address is either .com, or outside the US the local ending for their country. Everything else is very unlikely.
Consumer behavior can change. When I first got on the internet, the country TLD where I live was useless. Having a domain with that extension made you look mickey mouse. Anyone remembering your domain would type in the .com. But that's changing - today I'd rather have the country TLD than the .com. I believe consumers find the country TLD more trustworthy and relevant.
There's two neat things that can come of this. The first is the ability to act as a registrar for a specific TLD. If you can grab .widgets, then it's just a matter of marketing to get all the widget dealers to pay their $8.95 a year to you instead of to the .com folks.
Secondly, I bet there's a market to resell the technology needed to set up and maintain this. I sell widgets and want to own .widgets but don't have any clue or interest on how to maintain that. You pop up with a complete hosted solution for them for $#*$!XX per year.
> bring it on
yep - the lawyers are the only winners here. Thats double true if the lawyers happen to be domainers as well.
> "Downtown real estate in Los Angeles doesn't
> get any less valuable because someone's building out in Oxnard.""
It does if that downtown realestate is called "McDonalds.com" and those dweebes out in Oxnard want to build "McDonalds.Oxnard"! That is a massive devaluation of McDonalds.com.
But marketing names with unlimited.extensions can.b.a.paine because.theyarenorul.es and the next guy with get.theone-with-an.s. People get confu.sed and either ignore the new ones or lose trust them in them.
We've already covered that its not the general public, as it'll be much easier to trick them into visiting dodgy websites and is likely to confuse them.
We've already covered that its not web developers - some of who will have to spend time rewriting and testing email address validation checks on website forms to allow for these new extensions.
We've covered that its not good for companies as the cost of buying up all variations of their brands become astronomical.
Its not good for existing domain owners as the value of their domains will decrease with all the extra domains available.
So who does ICANN expect to benefit from this, aside from themselves? I'm still not really clear on who ICANN are saying needs this or why it says we need this.
[edited by: TravelSite at 8:45 am (utc) on July 2, 2008]
www.ford www.sears www.amazon www.NewYork www.scottsdale www.dell
or
www.ford.com www.sears.com www.amazon.com www.NewYork.com www.scottsdale.com www.dell.com
The answer is obvious and the reason I am predicting a significant decline in dot-com traffic and values in the years ahead.
The only tld which I feel will retain its value and traffic is dot-org because I doubt if many organizations will want to buy their own tld what with the nice trust factor and non-commercial connotation which goes hand-in-hand with dot-org.
P.S. To make these new tld's appear to be even more valuable I believe they can successfully resolve even without the www such as just plain 'Ford' for example, based on server setup.
This change makes domains and extensions limitless, like it should be. The current system isn't yet bulging at the seams, but it eventually will be. This change prevents that from happening.
This change makes domains and extensions limitless, , like it should be
Is naive.
Why in the world we have a short list like .com, .net, .org is beyond me
The people who designed the DNS did a pretty good job and those looking to change things need to understand the thinking behind not only what is there but also what isn't there and why that might be ;) before they look to changing things on a theoretical whim or worse for self interest.
The people who designed the DNS did a pretty good job and those looking to change things need to understand the thinking behind not only what is there but also what isn't there and why that might be before they look to changing things on a theoretical whim or worse for self interest.
Well said.
It completely blows my mind that ICANNT's greed has power over their (apparent lack of) logic. Big bummer...
actually it's ford.com sears.com etc. etc. so it's not less characters. These top names are already established, Ford and Macys and the likes will not rebrand, there is no need to.
actually it's ford.com sears.com etc. etc. so it's not less characters.
I feel a big value point with the new tld's is that I believe they may be able to resolve even without the www (depending on server setup) i.e. just plain Ford which is shorter and better vs Ford.com or www.Ford.com
Does this mean doomsday for .com, .net, .mobi etc domain names resale value?
For .com, .net, .org and country TLDs, not a chance, these are firmly entrenched names. Names like .pro .mobi .tel .travel and a number of other off brands are probably not goihg to do all that well I think.
After a point, it gets too darn hard to remember a lot of TLD names and I think folks will tend to go into overload.
Let's take the recent example of .Me - I know of one very major brand who has a .me name, while another competing brand does not. Both are well known in their industry, yet one has apparently decided to go the "we will sue or file a domain dispute if our name gets used" route. Perhaps that is the wise thing to do when there are simply too many TLD names in which to register your brand.
If .anyTLD concept actually takes off, I can see some brand protection companies having to build data centers to rival what Google owns to keep up.
I think this all goes back to the old saw about data vs information. That being the case people will default to their highest comfort levels, .com, .net, .org and their country TLD.
In the final analysis I'm guessing .anyTLD will be something of a non-event.
-Commerce
Perhaps that is the wise thing to do when there are simply too many TLD names in which to register your brand.
The TLD itself becomes the brand!
You may be missing the fact a big positive and main benefit with the unlimited new tld's is that the extension itself in-effect becomes the brand and not what goes in front of the dot, i.e. Ford tld or whatever.
[edited by: Janochka at 12:11 am (utc) on July 30, 2008]
