Group again asks ICANN to not allow any individual sports to get top level domain names.
Last August the so-called .Sport Policy Advisory Council (basically a group that wants to launch the .sport top level domain name) told ICANN it was unhappy with the idea that there could be individual sports (such as .baseball) as top level domains. At the time, the .Sport Policy Advisory Council wrote:
We cannot accept ICANN approving any applications for top-level domains that could diminish the solidarity implied with .SPORT.
This coming from a group that may not even be awarded .sport!
You can read about its original request to ICANN here.
They’re at it again, sending another letter (pdf) to ICANN’s Board and CEO explaining that it would be completely unacceptable for ICANN to accept applications for individual sports, such as .football, .basketball, etc.
The PAC looks forward with anticipation to the release of the 4th Draft Applicant Guidebook prior to your next ICANN meeting in Brussels in June 2010. In this regard, we again emphasize that the PAC is unwavering in its position that ICANN acknowledge, respect and not interfere with the core value of sport solidarity by ensuring that individual sports not be introduced unless and until the international sports family has had time to gauge their impact on sport solidarity and international federations independently. The PAC members reiterate our concern that ICANN may be prematurely entertaining a process that will allow proliferation of names in sub-categories or individual sports, which will lead to a number of detrimental effects (as detailed in our August 20th, 2009 letter which we have attached for your reference) in the event that ICANN does not take into account the PAC’s previously stated position, which is that we emphatically oppose any diminution of .SPORT.
You really can’t make this stuff up.
David J Castello says
And the Brass Balls Award goes to…
Rob says
.42 trumps all other TLDs. It is after all the answer to life, the universe, and everything. Although i would say that .sport is a great idea for TLD and good luck to them.
tricolorro says
Well, I represent the:
“Everything Internet, Internet Everything Advisory Council’
We are applying for the vanity top level domain .everything.
We don’t want ICANN to allow any other vanity top level domains, including .sport, as it would seriously impact and diminish our .everything top level domain.
tricolorro says
How is that for Ridiculousness???
Ron Jackson says
These have to be the most arrogant, obnoxious people on the planet. I hope ICANN has the good sense to tell them to get lost. The whole idea behind the new TLDs is (at least in theory) to bring unlimited options to the name space – not restrict it by giving one group of common sense challenged pinheads a monopoly on an entire category of extensions while they pay for just one.
I think the idiotic letters they have already sent ICANN should permanently disqualify them for consideration to run any new TLD, I’m sure they would do nothing but create headaches for ICANN and other new TLD applicants with unending silly “demands” in the future if they are allowed to get their nose under the tent flap. Better to cut this gang that can’t shoot straight off at the pass from the very start.
.Sport2 says
From: http://www.icann.com/en/topics/new-gtlds/factsheet-new-gtld-program-oct09-en.pdf
What happens if there are other applications for the same gTLD?
ICANN does not allow for two or more identical gTLDs. If there are two or
more applications for the same gTLD, applicants will be required to follow
the string contention procedures outlined in the Applicant Guidebook.
Applicants should also be aware that the same specific rules will apply if
two or more gTLD strings are considered to be highly similar by a panel
of experts. The two processes proposed by ICANN to deal with the
identical and similar gTLD applications are auctions and community
priority (comparative) evaluation. The latter applies only in cases where
there is a community-based applicant.
Andrew Allemann says
@ .Sport2- I think the .Sport Advisory Council is try to position itself as a “community”. I’m aware of at least one other group planning to go after .sport.
jp says
Maybe verisign should send a complaint that .sport may diminish the value of .com
Tim says
Here come the domain wars!
roddy says
i am going for .fart , what are my chances ?
Alan says
.sport … who knew?
more importantly, who cares.
Shaun says
@roddy
As the genius behind .gas, I have to object to your application, as it will diminish the solidarity implied with .gas.
John Berryhill says
One hardly thinks they are appropriate representatives of sportsmanlike conduct.
Isn’t .net for basketball?
Jim Fleming says
The TLD selections are automated. SPORTS is more popular.
792 SPORTS
366 SPORT
http://SPORTS.NAME
http://SPORT.NAME
Chip Meade says
Silly Mr. Berryhill.
.net is for fishing and .coop is for chicken farming.