comment for the new TLDs plan

[Jusaito Sanchez <xirimeta231@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

In my humild opinion ".political" and ".company" are both very bad ideas. (by 
".company" I mean letting companies have a whole TLD for themselves, and by 
".political". I mean any activity frequently subjected to strong political 
forces, for example .catholic or .left or .fascism)

.toys, .cars, .sports and so on should all be ok because they define 
industries, 
so a TLD can make some sense as part of the domain name providing 
additional/complementary information about itself, just as .org gives a hint on 
charity and .net suggests network companies.

.xxx would be an industry, BUT it's actually one of the worst cases to start 
with since it is a very polemical industry. Perhaps the only worst examples are 
.slaves and .drugs. There are economies where these industries are perfectly 
legal. Has ICANN thought what will it do when proposals like these come to the 
table?With what sense of justice will ICANN deny a registry to run .drugs once 
approved .xxx?

Why could ".political" and ".company" be very bad ideas? Because they will very 
likely put internet stability at risk and they will fracture it at some point. 
It's almost granted that this will happen, only a question of when, given that 
they are TLDs about issues that people often get very angry about.

Doesn't seem that all this big move is very well aligned with the one common 
goal of "a secure, stable and unified global internet".

Additional side effects include, but are not limitid to: ICANN having to put 
HUGE amounts of resources in legal battles, resources that should be invested 
in 
maintaining infrastructure, or resources that should have been never obtained 
from the pockets of domain registrants.

Another "nice" side effect from all this so called "innovation": governments, 
companies and individuals will need to pay to be... exactly as they are now! We 
will ALL have to pay to the ICBM registry a tax to avoid RobertBaker.xxx ever 
being used. How about also paying in the future to avoid 
RobertBaker.anarchists? 
Hope Robert Baker is starting to save money, buying nothing is about to get 
very 
expensive.

ICANN seems to have lost its goal: INCREASE COMPETITION?? Well, how about this: 
A dotcom domain costs about 0.35USD per year for Verisign to maintain, yet they 
charge more than 6.00USD per domain per year to registrars. What's even more 
shameful, they have risen the prices in the last years while technology prices 
have gone down. Conclusively the owner of all dotcoms are not registrants 
worldwide, its the verisign monopoly, as they are the ones who make the big 
profit from any domain no matter its use and just for the simple act of being 
into existence.

But ICANN does nothing about this monopoly abuse on domain prices. One can 
sadly 
contemplate the possibility that ICANN is making a profit behind the scene from 
this too, which would be very sad as ICANN is supposedly a non-profit 
organization. 


Does ICANN really care about promoting competition? Well, why not start with 
this obious issue that affects everyone?! Why wanting to get so urgently into 
such muddy areas as the new TLDs?!

Conclusion: If ICANN really is a non-profit organisation and that comment of 
"one common goal of a secure stable and unified global internet" is not a lie, 
it should stop the BIG MONEY operations named as "innovation" and leave real 
innovation for online entrepreneurs.

Lucas
online entrepreneur