ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]

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

Re: [alac] new gTLDs

  • To: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [alac] new gTLDs
  • From: Esther Dyson <edyson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 17:22:29 -0500

I'm not sure we can resolve this all at once, but I don't really think new unrestricted gTLDs are that great of a way to resolve the so-called artificial scarcity. It is a *real* scarcity - the scarcity of space in people's minds. (people want the same term in .com, not in .whatsit.) Whereas sponsored TLDs *do* help, by creating extra space. so how about a broad roll-out of more *sponsored* ones?

e.g.: United.com -- only one
add .biz, info, .web, .info.... not much help. United is still a pretty limited-use trademark. [until you add so many that the whole thing becomes meaningless, which may well be the most desirable outcome.]

But if you add .aero, .law, .van, and restricted TLDs, you multiply the word United by a variety of specific uses.

So we should probably just listen, since like you I don't know of any surveys I would trust on user opinion on this topic. (And opinion is not the only guide. Some good assessment as to likely impact of various policies would also be helpful.)


At 10:20 AM 3/5/2003, Wendy Seltzer wrote:
I'll be participating in a DNSO new gTLD committee call tomorrow. Their immediate objective is to give a recommendation on how to structure the namespace for new gTLDs.

I'd like to get a sense of whether the ALAC wants to comment on either the substantive issues of namespace structuring or the procedural issues of how at-large should be involved with the substantive discussion going forward.

To this point, the gTLD Committee has heard from the business constituency and non-commercial. The business constituency has recommended limited rollout of sponsored, restricted TLDs; non-commercial has called for more rapid expansion, including new generic, unrestricted names.

Substantively, I lean toward more rapide expansion of the namespace, without rigid structure imposed, because I think many current domain name conflicts come from artificial scarcity. There doesn't need to be any technical shortage of domain names. Procedurally, it would be good to find a way to hear from the at-large public -- are we aware of any user surveys or other means by which they've spoken already?

For this call, I expect mostly to listen, and suggest that I prepare comments after taking their ideas back to the ALAC.


Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School
Chilling Effects: http://www.chillingeffects.org/

Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes! chairman, EDventure Holdings writer, Release 3.0 (on Website below) edyson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 1 (212) 924-8800 -- fax 1 (212) 924-0240 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor) New York, NY 10011 USA http://www.edventure.com

The conversation continues..... at

PC Forum 2003 - March 23 to 25, Phoenix
Who? what? where? Data comes alive!

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy