I will tell you why....The carnage that has been hitting the dot com TLD only further
links it with failure. Afilias (Verisign, Register.com, et al) did not want
dot INFO....I repeat...they did not want dot INFO...They wanted dot WEB. Look
back at their response to the question posed to them by ICANN about how they would
take things if they were to get dot INFO or dot SITE as opposed to Dot Web.
They didn't paint a very good picture (costly to market a dot INFO / dot SITE, as
opposed to dot WEB). I think the intial registration of the dot info domain
will be strong, but will mostly come from existing owners in the same name and/or
speculators (which isn't illegal). Therefore my prediction is that by Christmas
2001 when the stark reality sets in: That there is NO good extension out there
to replace the damaged dot COM, they (ICANN) will be under the gun to get Dot Web
uploaded....
TO ICANN: If you do read this, I hope you realize it's better
to be prepared for dot web, then to second guess this, and have to scramble at the
last minute. I don't think the President of the United States is going to allow
ICANN to hold back the ability to conduct lawful commerce on the internet....Yes,
Killer.web represents my 'vehicle' to conduct interstate commerce. There is
definitely a new attitude in Washington DC with regards to how small business owners
are treated, who I MIGHT ADD make up the bulk of the existing dot web registrants
at Image Online Design.
TO Dr Cerf: If you read this sir, I am not
sure I followed you on your response to a question posed to you on the ICANNwatch.com
message board. The question was in regards to how ICANN will treat alternate
registries when you begin selecting new TLDs in the future. Your response was
that ICANN sees Alternate Registries operating outside the root, and that is how
it will stay. I would wholeheartedly agree with this to a point. The
exception should be for those registeries like a Image Online Design who paid $50,000
for the "chance" to be selected. They should have an equal chance as any registry
who applied. The instructions posted on the ICANN website last September for
those applying for a TLD did not state that existing Registries could not apply or
be looked at. Also I might include the fact Image Online Design has followed
all IANA and ICANN policy rules to date, to include UDRP from what I understand.
In a sense they are working "within your parameters" and "inside" rather than outside
ICANN. In case you weren't refering to Image Online Design in your comments,
as I suspect you weren't, given the level of cooperation by Image Online Design in
this process, I do sincerely apologize...
Regards,
Gregory