Slashdot Mirror


ICANN Proposes New Way To Buy Top-Level Domains

narramissic writes "Late last week, ICANN put up for comment a new top-level domain (TLD) proposal that would open up the market for generic TLDs on the Internet, basically allowing anyone with $185,000 to buy a new TLD. ICANN has based the cost of a generic TLD on what it believes will be the cost to evaluate applications and protect the organization against risk, said Paul Levins, ICANN's executive officer and vice president for corporate affairs. Any excess money would be redistributed based on the wishes of the Internet community, he said. As of late Tuesday, there were only a couple of comments on the proposal."

28 of 198 comments (clear)

  1. Yes! by Gizzmonic · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now I can finally register clownpenis.fart !

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    1. Re:Yes! by eln · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good luck. I predict a fierce bidding war for .fart.

    2. Re:Yes! by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In all seriousness, we have enough ghetto TLDs already...Shelling out 200k for a TLD that may languish in obscurity forever sounds like a risky proposition.

      The only real use I see for it is for sites that are forced to register massive numbers of subdomains: having your own TLD would give you a lot of flexibility in that situation. Otherwise? I'm just not getting it.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:Yes! by Warll · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You think .fart is going to be a bidding war? Anyone what to guess what .sex is going to go for?

    4. Re:Yes! by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Funny

      More than it's worth? Sex.com never even came close to making back it's...hem...wad.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    5. Re:Yes! by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Funny

      ICANN has .cheezburger?

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    6. Re:Yes! by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 3, Funny

      A mysterious Nigerian benefactor has offered to transfer the entire .spam TLD to me. I'll receive 10% of everything, and all I need to do is transfer a few personal details to him...

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    7. Re:Yes! by jez9999 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You were just waiting 10 years to say that one, weren't you? :-)

  2. Coming soon... by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Funny

    Slashdot takes the piss by setting its new homepage at aich-tee-tee-pee-colon-slash-slash-slash-dot-dot-dot-slashdot. All those going to aich-tee-tee-pee-colon-slash-slash-slashdot-dot-com are redirected to idle.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  3. Re:money? by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

    Since it's going to be spent according to the wishes of the "Internet community", I can only assume 95% of it will be spent on porn.

  4. Pete and Repeat walk into a bar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/24/1716233&from=rss

  5. Hmmm... by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is probably a bad idea, but the article tags did suggest a great new TLD: .wtf.

    --
    Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    1. Re:Hmmm... by ByOhTek · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think 'dot' would be an ideal TLD...

      http://slashdot.dot/

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just wait until someone gets FuckYou.Jesus

  6. Internet governance and the common man by billtom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hate to be cynical (no, that's a lie, I love to be cynical), but what's the point of commenting on this to ICANN.

    ICANN has proven again and again that they listen to corporations and governments (mostly the American) but really couldn't care less what the general internet users want. Or even what the general internet users need. Sure, they'll put up some superficial show of consulting the community, but it never amounts to much.

    ICANN has been bought and paid for. Really, the only way a normal internet user can comment on ICANN's actions is to take their business elsewhere (ie. alternate DNS roots).

    1. Re:Internet governance and the common man by Intron · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
  7. Truth in advertising? by Yarhj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This sounds like a pretty bad idea. The first thing that comes to mind is the wholesale registration of TLD's for typosquatting.

    At least they'll be able to register a proper domain: .con

  8. Just fraking stop by 800DeadCCs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do we have the basic TLDs? yes, stop...
    Does pretty much every country have its own basic TLD? yes, stop...
    whoever came up with this idea, please, stop...
    especially for that low a price... maybe for $1.85 billion, but not $185,000.

    ICANN needs to learn how to play solitaire, maybe then they'd get the reason they're there.
    (hint, it's the first rule of both business and IT... "whatever you do, don't touch it").

  9. Re:money? by mweather · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when does the internet community pay for porn?

  10. The question we should ask ourselves by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is how many orders of "herbal viagra" do you need to sell to pull in $185,000 to register .v1agra (or other such clever alternate spelling) to run your spamming operation with no registrar oversight ever again?

    Yes, this is a terrible idea for reasons already brought up.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  11. Problem? by Lord_Sintra · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone want to try buying .php, or .exe, just to see what happens?

  12. Suffixes FTW! by Itninja · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I predict a large outpouring of capital to secure any suffix TLD. Just think how companies will clamor to make words out of their URL (see: de.licio.us). I am going to buy ".ing" and ".est" and make a fortune!

    --
    I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
  13. How do they define administrative costs? by RustinHWright · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Your points bring up another two.

    Firstly, ICANN doesn't do all that they should now to "manage" domains and if they're going to add more, then they should do a more honest job of determining the level of service they will commit to for what is, let's face it, a discretionary option. Nobody NEEDS their own TLD. This is about things that are optional. That being the case, isn't it long past time that ICANN committed to having some sort of effective system to address, for example, claimjumping? I lost a domain a few years back because I was in the hospital for two months, in and out of conciousness for several weeks of that, and yet some fucker has been able to come in and take my domain, use it only to get traffic on the subjects I used it for, and my host provider and everybody else I talk to says that basically I'm screwed. Where the hell is ICANN at a time like this?
    Afaict, from the first ten pages or so of TFA, the only costs they assess are those of reviewing and processing the application, which is not how any rational organization would approximate them, Even after the application, there will be costs of some sort to maintain the damned thing and afaic, for something this discretionary they should set the bar higher and commit to providing better service, service that costs money, services like domain ownership arbitration, and then estimate the total costs to incorporate that level of service.

    In another point, from spagetti suppers at smalltown churches to sale of air rights by private schools, there is nothing unusual about a non-profit treating sale of non-essential goods as a profit opportunity. The term "non-profit" is an oversimplification, as anybody who has gone around selling candy for their sports team knows. We know that some people would pay tens of millions for their own TLD and we know that nobody NEEDS their own TLD so why shouldn't they charge at least a few million each?

    --
    It's all about the information. And what we do with it.
    1. Re:How do they define administrative costs? by rs79 · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Where the hell is ICANN at a time like this? "

      That is nothing to do with ICANN's mandate, which is purely technical administration. You have a legal problem. Icann doesn't do anything about spam or ponies because they're not technical issues. Instead Icann focuses on, um trademark stuff which the government thinks is technical. Plus you're not rich enough for them to care about.

        Now, as for this "we'l do good things with the money" crap. I aint getting fooled again. The NSF directed NSI to retain 33% of all original domain names sales to put into an NSF "intellectual infrastructure" fund. "Intellectual infrastructure" was people and this money was for workshops, research grants and to, in the words of the man who made the fund, "keep the IETF *process* (not the ietf per se) pure".

      Congress appropriated it and gave it to Mike Roberts when he initially captures ICANN, for his useless Internet2 backbone. Never mind companies all over the world paid into that faund.

      Plus, if they want companies to be able to survive risk better, why are they taking 180K from them. How many companies are lest risky cause they gave away 180K for nothing?

      Now if it were me and I wanted to test a TLD I'd proably just tell you guys about it and by morning, of the server was still standing, I'm sure I'd have a pretty good idea what works and what doesn't.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
  14. Re:money? by blair1q · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since when are your eyeballs the "community".

    The Internet, like television, has become a farm, where website developers raise eyeball-bearing click-monkeys like you and sell them wholesale to advertising resellers.

    Once again, as with TV, you are not the customer of the Internet, you are its product.

  15. Complaint address by damn_registrars · · Score: 3, Informative
    From the gTLD Applicant Guidebook public Comment forum page, there is an address posted for comments:
    • gtld-intro@icann.org

    I strongly encourage people to write to that address and voice your opinion on the issue. That is, after all, why it is called a public forum.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  16. And what happens with local hostnames? by impaledsunset · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Many of us have named many of their local machines with a short name having no dots. Maybe as many use have a search setup for their local domain. So what happens if I happen to have a local machine named "tube", and someone decides to register the "tube" TLD and puts an A record on it, which he most likely will -- after all, if you owned a TLD, wouldn't you put your website there?

    You got it right, a big mess. And that's just the first thing that comes to mind that open TLD registration might disturb.

    I don't have any problem with TLDs being a mess. There is no way to put such a big system as the world DNS in good order and keep it tidy, and after you are used to it, it doesn't make much difference. It might even be better, or at least no worse, than it would have been if there were strict rules about who and what.

    However, opening the main namespace for open registration sounds to me like a bad idea. That's a big no-no for me. Especially when it is everyone's main domain namespace, and we are already using it excessivly for a lot of stuff.

    The good thing is that the impact wouldn't be that big as, while many companies could afford a TLD of that price, I hope there won't be a huge rush for registrations, and honestly, I don't have any boxes named 'ms' and 'ibm', and even if I have, renaming one or two wouldn't be much a trouble.

    But even then, this shouldn't be allowed. At all.

  17. Let me count the reasons... by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm failing to see why people would find this so objectionable...

    Perhaps because it's a blatantly obvious cash-grab by an organization whose ostensible purpose is to serve the Internet community, but instead lives off of it parasitically?

    Perhaps because it would require many people to register multiple domain names (possibly thousands) in order to protect their brands, or else leave them open to be registered by squatters and phishers.

    Perhaps because there's just no legitimate technical reason for it?

    Perhaps because it would be a giant pain in the ass and probably break various pieces of software, requiring people who have no interest in the issue either way to expend energy on it?

    Those are just the things that come immediately to mind.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."