Return to newtlds Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: fnord
Date/Time: Mon, July 3, 2000 at 7:09 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: pre-registration

Message:
 

        jrosenthal writes:

>Like I have mentioned before, if the registration systems are built properly, "techies" will not be able to use scripts to register all of the "good" domains.<

I think that the issue of scripts or automatic submissions has to be addressed, for any new domains. Even manual submissions on day one are going to be akin to a well co-ordinated flood attack. I don't think you can build a registration system that is immune to scripts, it is an arms race like much else online these days, they'll no sooner be able to block one exploit than someone will find a workaround.

If a registrar does manage to block them, do they even have a right to do so? If the registrar doesn't specifically ban automatic submissions and require that they be manual, do they not put themselves in legal jeopardy by blocking a submission? Even assuming they can tell a human from a script and expressly forbid the latter, an enterprising and well-funded speculator could hire a bank of speed typists. Don't laugh, someone would do it if they thought it would give them an edge.

The concept of first come first served worked in the early days but now it's all at light speed. If the internet is the Wild West, some will fancy themselves as gunslingers, and someone will invent a Gatling gun. I have no answer to this problem but I think it has to be addressed now or any concept of fairness is lost. This is yet another reason why I support chartered .reg domains, there is no benefit to registering in the first hour or day.

This is not to say that there should be no open domains tried. I suspect that the good names will be taken by speculators very quickly. As many speculators don't know a head from a body tag, most of those sites will never resolve, or will at best sprout 'for sale' signs and confusing affiliate links to unrelated sites. This will doom that TLD through a lack of interest by the general public. These sites also won't sell and go live with interesting content because those offering interesting content will continue to route around them.

Perhaps this will get it through to the speculators once and for all that there is almost no market for domain names, the gold rush is over (it never really began, it rivals Y2K as the biggest tech urban legend hype ever perpetrated), the only ones making money are those selling gold panning equipment, Great Domains et al, and most of them aren't profitable either.

>Let's see the supporters of ANY preregistrations (whether they be IOD, CORE, or Namespace) give their reasons why keeping preregistrations is good for the general Internet population<

Oops, got on a rant there. :) To answer your question, much as I have no sympathy for those who took a chance on .web (they flipped the coin and perhaps at least can tell a head from a tail) nevertheless I think .web and its database should be brought into the root. This is proof of concept time. Allow .web and some similar but not pre-registered open TLD and then compare what happens and learn from it, assuming there are any lessons to be found. If I was to run scripts on opening day I'd probably target the latter TLD.

I don't really think there will be much difference, I suspect any new open TLD will largely be a failure, amazon.com will also be at amazon.new or suing whomever is there first, mysmallnetbiz.new and mysmallnetbiz.com will both continue to lose money and fold, picturesofmydog.new will receive the same 10 visitors/year than its .com counterpart gets, buythisdomain.com and .new will both remain unsold, etc. There are tens or hundreds of thousands of ccTLD names registered now which aren't in use, having the same in .web and .new won't inconvenience the majority of net users so why not give it a try?

If it does turn out that .web functions better than its .new counterpart then that is something to keep in mind for the next round of TLDs. Surely not that pre-registrations should be allowed in the same fashion in future, .web was a historical anomaly that can't be repeated, a future pre-reg would be hit by the same scripts and problems as mentioned above. And the last thing we need is people starting a new gold rush by squatting or speculating on possible future TLDs. However, seeing how .web fares may have some instructive values as yet unseen.

>According to US law (ask your lawyers), IANA is a defunct agency, so any agreements, if any, made by them with other parties, are not binding for ICANN.<

While IOD has never been supported in court that is partly because it has never been properly tested. It is not inconceivable that a court could find in favor of IOD. The DNS shouldn't be managed by lawsuits. Nor should ICANN be managed by the threat of lawsuits. On balance, and it is no more than a flip of the coin really (I am not privy to what may occur behind closed doors), I think the interests of the public are best served by putting the .web issue behind us. It is from another age, when I could have posted the .web name I intend to register and it still would have been there when I arrived. Now it would be registered in seconds by a speculator and a price tag affixed, no doubt in the name of freedom.

This new age needs new strategies. I don't envy ICANN their mission. I don't envy the speculators either, the most succesful new TLD might be .boothill for all the for sale domains that will never sell regardless of what ICANN decides. The idea that opposition to .web shills is fueled by envy that I have no names to bury there is ludicrous.

     

d_d@email.com - email without ICANN in Subject: line is blocked


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy