Want to speak your mind? Today’s the day.
If you have an opinion (and you should) about the second draft of ICANN’s plans to inundate the web with more top level domain names, today is the deadline to submit comments.
As was the case last time, major corporations are waiting until the last day to submit comments. So far the trend seems to be that companies are saying “we submitted comments last time, you did nothing about them, so please refer to our previous comments”.
Moments ago comments from Time Warner were published. Among the company’s comments was a criticism of ICANN’s two whitewash white papers, which I believe ICANN is trying to use in place of a full economic study of the need for new top level domain names. Time Warner thinks the same thing:
A second “overarching issue†is labeled “TLD Demand and Economic Analysis.†As of April 10, the only action identified by ICANN to address this issue is the issuance in March of two papers on consumer welfare and price caps. These fall far short of what is needed, which is a comprehensive economic analysis that helps ICANN identify how to structure the rollout of new TLDs in a manner and at a pace that is most likely to result in increased competition and consumer choice. Some of the criteria for such a comprehensive study were outlined in an October 2006 ICANN Board resolution, which called for such a study to be commissioned. It is striking that this has apparently never occurred. The papers released in March clearly did not fulfill the requirements set by the Board over two years ago; nor did they even purport to do so.
Striking, indeed.
Submit comments by sending an email to [email protected].
Claude Gelinas says
Thanks for reminding me of this deadline.
Here’s my message to ICANN…
Dear ICANN,
I own over 800 domain names, most of which are .coms.
From my own experience, there are still lots of excellent .coms to be purchase, by anybody with a minimum of creativity when choosing their name.
Diluting the current gTLDs with new ones will bring you more revenue but it’ll inevitably create headaches for everyone else.
The .info and .biz aren’t picking up like they were supposed to and that’s a sign that diluting the current dots will not help accelerate adoption for the gTLD. More suffixes doesn’t instantly generate more relevancy.
As such, I kindly request that you refrain from further diluting the current gTLD suffix pool.
Kind regards,
…and then I signed.
Maybe it can inspire other domainers to do the same ; )
M. Menius says
I have read a large volume of responses in ICANN’s public comments section. It’s plain as day. If they persist in lieu of the huge dissent, then the government’s contract with ICANN will need to be terminated, and transfer to another regulatory body worked out.
The amount of time and resources being wasted on the new gTLD proposal is pretty alarming. The obstacles and problems are numerous and complex. ICANN alone have neither the will nor the means to adequately solve the problems outlined in the public letters.
My hunch is that ICANN will naively, stubbornly press forward while maintaining an air of concern … but without substantively fixing the many problems their plan will introduce. This will provide the fuel for challenging their competency and legitimacy.
Higher level public officials have no idea the snafus this organization has created. Once it’s learned that ICANN are on the brink of an irreversible last snafu that will undermine the stability of the internet, then I predict a firestorm of negative sentiment and corresponding action will proceed that will reel ICANN in, or lead to their dissolution.
Again, ICANN’s gTLD plan is not needed, and will introduce a myriad of risks … sll avoidable. “Consumers” will suffer. “Businesses” will suffer. ICANN will experience an unprecedented influx of new capital. And the internet will be subject to tenfold the current level of abuses.