Displaying posts under "Uncategorized"
New TLD .domains launches tomorrow.
Starting tomorrow you’ll be able to register .domains domains.
Seriously: anything.domains will be up for grabs.
The Early Access Program phase for Donuts’ top level domain .domains starts on March 5. A week later, on March 12, .domains domains will be available at standard pricing of around $30-$40.
I’m curious what types of domains will be registered in this namespace. I’m sure some registrars will participate.
As for domain investment opportunities, I’ve always found that domainers hate to pay a lot for domains with “domain” in them. I’m not quite sure why.
A few possible names stand out, but unfortunately they’ll be difficult to get.
Donuts has registry reserved premium.domains. Register.domains is on the name collisions list, but even if it wasn’t I suspect it would be reserved. Donuts has reserved register.TLDs in its other domains.
One domain that will be available is expired.domains. But you’ll have to open your pocket book. The domain is a premium one at a level I’ve never seen before from Donuts.
GoDaddy is asking a whopping $1,499 per year. Name.com has it for $960 per year.
If you buy it during the Early Access Program period it will set you back even more for the first year.
Tim Switzer has been hire by the .Build top level domain name registry.
A familiar face in the domain name registry business is joining the .Build team.
Tim Switzer, most recently with DotGreen, will manage the company’s operations and registrar relations activities.
Switzer was with Neustar prior to joining DotGreen. DotGreen’s bid for .green failed after the company determined it couldn’t compete in an auction for the domain name. Afilias ended up winning the .green contention set.
Switzer will have his work cut out for him at .build. The company plans to offer registrations for about $100, near the high end of registration pricing. It also faces competition from other domains including .construction.
That said, the building business is big. Just as an example, .Build is heading to ConExpo in Las Vegas this week. Over 125,000 people are expected to attend the show about asphalt, concrete, mining, and utilities.
New domain names and the Super Bowl headlined last month on Domain Name Wire.
February was a high traffic month on Domain Name Wire thanks to some momentum from the first batch of English language top level domain names.
Oh, and the Super Bowl stole a couple headlines, too.
Here’s a look at the top five articles on Domain Name Wire last month:
1. .Guru rockets to over 10,000 domain names – .Guru is the runaway winner thus far amongst new top level domain name launches. As of today it’s over 40,000 registrations.
2. GoDaddy auction data provide early indication of new TLD demand and values – GoDaddy provided Domain Name Wire with data around auctions for new top level domain names, including top sales so far.
3. How GoDaddy found Gwen, the woman who quit her job in a Super Bowl Commercial – One lucky woman launched her business with a Super Bowl commercial. It was free, too.
4. GoDaddy Super Bowl ads once against put domain biz in the spotlight – In addition to the commercial featuring a woman quitting her job (see #3), GoDaddy also ran a commercial with Danica Patrick and bodybuilders promoting the company’s Get Found product.
5. Check out what this company did with its .Co domain name – An Austin company took an unusual step to make sure people got its web address correct.
Due in part to poor distribution, initial launches fail to garner same traction as other launched TLDs.
Frank Schilling’s Uniregistry released its first two top level domain names in general availability yesterday.
According to the latest zone files, there are around 2,000 registered .sexy domain names and almost 700 .tattoo.
Although zone files don’t include all registered domain names, these numbers seem to jive with initial tallies Frank Schilling provided on twitter yesterday.
Because of the timing of zone file publishing, this zone file doesn’t include the first full day of launch. It should include domain names that were pre-ordered, though.
Yesterday Frank Schilling tweeted:
As I wrote on Monday, Uniregistry’s domain names aren’t available at most of the big domain name registrars. This apparently has to do with Terms of Service and contract wrangling. There were also apparently some technical difficulties.
I know Schilling looks at new TLDs as a marathon instead of a sprint. At the same time, a domain that does well out of the gate can take on a life of its own and grow into a good business. .Sexy and .tattoo were handicapped out of the gate.
The good news for Schilling is he has plenty more domains coming out and time to figure out how to make them work.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering: I’m not the Andrew that registered AndrewIs.sexy.
Complainant argues that two panelists are biased and should not hear the case. The panel disagrees.
Last week a World Intellectual Property Organization panel handed down a decision in a UDRP brought against ParkRoyal.com.
The panel found in favor of of respondent Vertical Axis, which was represented by ESQwire. But the decision itself was only a sideshow to a battle over panelists.
In a three person panel, both the complainant and respondent get to suggest three panelists. WIPO then selects one from each list. Each party also plays a role in selecting the presiding panelist.
Naturally, when it comes to the initial suggestions, each party selects panelists that they believe will be more favorable to their position. The complainant is going to name panelists who lean toward complainants or have decided on issues in previous cases relevant to the instant case. The respondent has a similar mindset and looks for panelists that it believes will give it a fair chance, not the other way around.
In the ParkRoyal.com case, the complainant suggested that two of the respondent’s panelist suggestions were inherently biased in favor of the respondent. The panel found otherwise, and it went through a lengthy discussion of the complainant’s challenge.
The panel acknowledged the the three person panel process was designed to allow each party to make a contribution to the selection of one panel member and the third member of the panel. It determined that there could be a challenge to a clear case of bias, but that the complainant had not made a good case that either of the panelists should be dismissed for clear bias. Merely ruling in a certain way in previous cases is not a sign of bias.
In this case, one panelist recused himself rather than have to defend his record. That’s an unfortunate result.
This case will undoubtedly be looked to as precedent in future cases in which complainants try to get panelists dismissed.