ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Regarding the introduction of new gTLD's

  • To: new-gtlds-dns-stability@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Regarding the introduction of new gTLD's
  • From: PSByOwner@xxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:56:43 EST

Dear Sirs,
I would like to make 2 primary points with regards to the introduction of  
new gTLD's.
#1. It is clear that there is an administrative policy of ICANN to neatly  
categorize the Internet by domain name extensions. For example, .biz for  
businesses, .org for organizations, etc. It is clearly too late to attempt  to 
this. The Internet is already 'liberalized' to the point that domain  name 
endings mean little with respect to their web content. An online  store could 
be a 
.org, and an information website could be a .com. This is  because ICANN has 
correctly not interfered or regulated who gets what  domain name endings; and 
for what their purpose is to be at the point of  registration. Such a 
regulation is not economically enforceable by ICANN; nor is  the cost to 
maintain a 
policing body to enforce such content rules. This leaves  the question of 
'Purpose': Why introduce a flood of new domain names into a  already 
established and 
stable marketplace? Why disrupt a stable system of  domain values without a 
justifiable reason to do so? 
ICANN seriously needs to reevaluate its directive of  categorization to fit 
with the realities that are present today. These realities  underscore what 
already is 'absolute liberalization': as such, domain name  extensions are, in 
and of themselves, meaningless. Are new gTLD's really needed  now? One need 
observe the lack of development on the last cluster of names  to know new 
extensions are not needed. Simply put, .biz, .info, .name, etc  have only been 
fractionally developed; Which leads me to my second  point:
#2. ICANN Administration seems to be working forward on a  backwards, 
outdated premise: That there exists a major demand for new Internet  
and domain name endings. This premise is built on  the domain name speculation 
era; where there was a great sense of  urgency to create more name endings. 
Domains were not regulated at point of  sale to have any particular class of 
content, based on domain name ending.  Therefore, new domain name extensions 
only address expansion and availability  issues; not any need for Internet 
'categorization' of content. 
I conclude with an analysis of the realities of today: The purpose of a  
domain name extension is to create a website that people know about and visit,  
for the benefit of those that register domain names. What good is a domain name 
if no one visits it? More non distinct name endings mean more expenses to  
market websites by smaller companies and individuals; to get people to visit  
their websites. The costs for google.com and yahoo.com advertising has become  
prohibitive to small companies and individuals. This in turn favors the larger  
companies, who have vast amounts of marketing capital for their Internet  
operations. There should be additional Anti-Trust concerns, because richer,  
larger companies will be favored with any dilution of the name space with more  
irrelevant domain name endings.
Thank you for your attention.
Bryan Suitt

**************The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy 
Awards. Go to AOL Music.      

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy