WWW inventor discusses the web 30 years later, including his decision to operate it on the DNS.
The inventor of the World Wide Web must sigh a lot.
Speaking to The Guardian on the 30th anniversary of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee said:
Every time I hear that somebody has managed to acquire the [domain] name of their new enterprise for $50,000 (£38,500) instead of $500, I sigh, and feel that money’s not going to a good cause.
Berners-Lee told the Guardian that it’s a minor regret that came from his decision to build on top of the domain name system.
He continued:
You wanted a name for your website, you’d go and ask [American computer scientist] Jon Postel, you know, back in the day, and he would give you a name….
…At the time that seemed like a good idea, but it relied on it being managed benevolently…There are plenty of domain names to go around, but the way people have invested, in buying up domains that they think entrepreneurs or organisations will use – even trying to build AI that would guess what names people will want for their organisations, grabbing the domain name and then selling it to them for a ridiculous amount of money – that’s a breakage.
I’m sure Berners-Lee didn’t foresee this, but I’m also curious how he would have done it differently if he could go back in time. It’s also worth noting that there are many available domain names available across over 1,000 top level domains, so there’s no real shortage of web addresses that are freely available to register.
Berners-Lee also laments the creation of walled gardens such as apps and Facebook. They use the web platform, but web addresses are the key:
“So there’s web technology inside, but what we’re saying is if, from the user’s point of view, there’s no URL, then we’ve lost.”
Wolfgang Möcklin says
The web is unlimited, that won’t change. Attention-space is limited.
Logan says
Yes, benevolence is a great ideal and all but it doesn’t reflect the reality of human nature. Jon Postel would simply have had millions of dollars thrown at him for new domain names as people tried to gain an edge in the face of competition for a highly scarce and highly in-demand domain name. We as humans cannot simply ignore market forces as much as some people want to. They are a fact of life in any economy. Even in Communist countries like USSR, North Korea and Cuba there are “black markets” that provide for the people when the government has failed to do so through central planning. It’s no different with domain names.
Ivan R says
That’s just how human beings work. Markets find new and creative ways to generate use of a product, incomes, and innovation. I am sure many an inventor could say the same thing. Ultimately, with trial and error, that’s for the best.
Jon Schultz says
Another self-righteous moralist who doesn’t believe in a free market or recognize how domain speculation supports the free services offered by the registrars, has enriched ICANN (for what that’s worth) and makes people more aware of the importance of domain name branding.
Jon Schultz says
Furthermore, if smart domainers weren’t supporting themselves buying and selling domains they might have little choice but to sell their talents to organizations which are defrauding the public or raping the environment.
Jon Schultz says
I’ll retract calling Mr. Berners-Lee a “self-righteous moralist” because 1) I don’t like labeling people, who can always change; and 2) I’m hardly immune to self-righteous moralism myself.
Nevertheless, his comments were very insulting of domain investors, many of whom are very generous with the funds they make from domaining.
And Mr. Berners-Lee may also wish to note that ICANN has now made a huge amount of money from the new GTLD program, primarily as a result of sanctioning the registries to price both “normal” and “premium” domains as they wish.
Personally, with ICANN having caved in to the “intellectual property lobby” and authorizing the UDRP witch hunts which have been going on for years, I think society would be much better off with those funds in the hands of domain investors.
Truth says
No. You want something of value, you pay a proper price for it. The rent on a 1500 square foot storefront on a small corner location in Manhattan is $300,000 (marked down from $370,000 recently). Just empty space. You still pay for all the improvements, fixtures, branding, etc. And the rent goes up 3% a year. And when the landlord wants his space back to rent it to the next Bank of America or Walgreens, you have to close and move. All your customers, brand equity built in the location is gone.
So what we should really be lamenting is the greed of real estate developers, property owners who make it nearly impossible for business owners to open a physical business or earn a living. A few thousand dollars for a domain name, or even $50,000 for a premium domain is nothing for a business or well-funded startup. Domain owners make it possible for businesses to have a home online. Domain owners are not the greedy ones. And entrepreneurs are no more entitled to a free or super low cost premium domain name of their choice than they are to rent the corner location in Manhattan for free. Period.
.
Ethan says
Would he sigh every time someone sells a land or real estate? Probably not. He is misunderstanding domaining and aren’t seeing that domaining is a legitimate investment, too, just like buying/selling land/real estate is.
John Dorian says
Probably you doesn’t realize what is difference between DNS and real property. If you bought a land or real estate, you can defend it, so no one can use you property at the same time with you. If you bought a domain, you bought it in hierarchy of DNS-servers, preferred by default in mass-market devices only. Anyone can create own public nameserver which resolve google.com to 66.254.114.41, and share this nameservers settings with any people who want use it. Strange example, but I hope you catch the idea about decentralised spirit of DNS.
Ethan says
My point is not that the technical aspects are all similar but that the right of owning or the legality of selling a domain is just like the ones of real property.
snoopy1267 says
I doubt he is “misunderstanding” domaining. Many people don’t like it, it is a fact just like people don’t like email marketers, used car salesmen and lawyers.
Ethan says
Okay. If he understands domaining and just doesn’t like domaining, I would have no problem conclude that his remark about domaining is simply biased.
Domainer says
I wonder if he lives in a free standing home development, apartment building or a planned city ???
That land was purchased from the third generation farmer (or family estate) by a land developer who sold the property (or building lots). then, a builder built something on it.
Did he sigh when the farmer sold the property ?
Or, when the builder sold the house to him?
Or, should have all of the people beginning with the farmer to the builder who sold it, sell the land to him for out of pocket cost?
thelegendaryjp says
It’s an odd way to think about your creation, I want people to use it for free but the truth is it only lives and has thrived because of demand and thus valuable. It’s a catch 22 and one he cannot be naïve enough to think it wasn’t a possibility or even cringe when he see’s them sell today. My guess is he likes to sound virtuous because that is what is valuable to him. He isn’t getting that resale money so why not say he wished he didn’t see it happen and get some virtue dollars. I know I sound harsh but it’s human nature to be self servient no matter who you are.
Tay says
He is just mad that he wasn’t smart enough to reserve all of these domains before anyone else.
adam says
I always find it interesting that even the most intelligent and visionary individuals (ones that can imagine/create something like the internet) can’t grasp or imagine where things would go . . . the growth and demand and how capitalism would influence their creations. Naive ?
Andrey Yashchuk says
Interesting to knew the meaning of webwaddress or domain name from internet inventor!
And this is really great insight to look at the domain name as not important thing but this is fact.
Many of people didn’t remember the exact URL of the site’s they’re visited.
The address required only for search engine and browsers not for people. Like the ip addresses which required but stay all time hidden.
People can write the ordinary text which answer the question – where you want to go now, and search engine shows the content.
Only content have meaning.
Stephen says
I had over 11,000 domain names and have sold some for over $100,000. It was a costly investment (yearly renewals and I bought most at auction when they expired). It’s not much different than buying investment properties. You have to wait for the right buyer. In some cases that was up to 13 years after I registered a domain.
Andrew Allemann says
Taken in the bigger picture, Berners-Lee has some regrets about how the WWW has turned out. This year’s letter focuses on government hacking, cyber bullying and more. I can understand why he wishes that domain names weren’t sold for a lot of money, but I think he made the right decision to work on DNS. I don’t know what he would have chosen otherwise.
Jack says
Tell your grandma I want her to sell me her vacant land for $500. I don’t care what she or her forefathers paid, or that so and so will pay more than me just because they have a successful business and could use it to it’s best potential — I want it now!
Welcome to Earth — where seemingly intelligent individuals are incapable of employing their intellect in objective assessment, and instead roll in a stink bath of self opinion and belief. Too afraid to look into a mirror to see the flaws in themselves and would rather criticise others for much less important things.
OK I want direct democracy, and to live in sustainable abundance where everyone cares about their neighbour, and money is no longer needed because everyones work is respected the same because we recognise it all contributes to a necessary standard of living. But you wanted capitalism or money economy, these are the rules and framework. If you don’t like it, please propose a new framework, or create your own along with other like minded individuals.
Jack says
I want to add, this was really directed at all critics of domain speculation. Tim appears to be an otherwise respectable person so this wasn’t meant to be a personal attack, but I did wish to point out that even intelligent individuals aren’t perfect etc.
Anonymous says
Yes we are.
joesaba2014 says
Here I copy and paste what a pioneer domainer write and be right.
“If you do not have a high-profile, memorable, easy-to-spell and gradable web address … you will find it increasingly difficult to compete and earn money on and off the Internet as this century progresses.”
C.S. Watch says
“You don’t understand! These people are murderers!” —Broadcast from Moscow, 1988.
Domain investors are proud to have been your FEMA sandbag against both corporate oligarchy and petty fraudsters for over two decades.
1) America’s largest conglomerates were registering thousands of domains a day in August ’95. To stop this freefall, domains were subtly made free to domainers for a short window. The Facebook jackboot is nothing compared to the bleached coral strip mall the internet would have become if domainers hadn’t picked up the tab.
2) Consumers protect themselves from potential fraudsters (read: startups) by looking straight up at the domain name. It is the swiftest and most secure method to gauge safety. We ask, ‘Have these people backed their word with a prestigious (read: expensive) domain name, which they’d hesitate to sully?’
“I would rather that you just said “thank you” and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand the post.”