ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] New TLDs PDP -- Should new TLDs be Introduced?

  • To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [ga] New TLDs PDP -- Should new TLDs be Introduced?
  • From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 06:27:00 -0800 (PST)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=JE5voBv3MR1yzxlWlvj1Ms85WMXH42/cJj9cININjM2pl60xYFqzRt9V2smUk1DUDcG9uKuxJYS1CVSA9YPm4TQBg3ebE38oIsTUQQyc8AEOPbxhnab94xByf/X7ZX9ztmWuYuMcGbntMtcPgxPn83/TMGfwjR7d0HOpDKx3vuM= ;
  • In-reply-to: <20051205124845.94961.qmail@web53511.mail.yahoo.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In a discussion on whether new TLDs should be
launched, it is important to understand the position
of those that do not support the creation of new TLDs.

In October 2004 the Copyright Coalition on Domain
Names offered a Statement presented by Steve Metalitz:


The CCDN statement was offered in response to the
document "Strategy: Introduction of New Generic
Top-Level Domains"

Excerpt:  "The draft strategy also seems skewed or
even pre-determined to granting new gTLDs.  It does
not specify any point at which it is possible for the
process to stop, with a conclusion that the
introduction of new gTLDs would be unwarranted at a
particular time. Rather, the choices at every step
seem to be for different ways of introducing new
gTLDs, not for whether there should be any new
introductions at all.  Similarly, it is unclear from
the draft strategy how and when the
process commences.  What would trigger the first step?
 Would the
process be something ICANN engages in on a regular,
predictable basis?  Surely, if ICANN has the ability
to recognize new gTLDs, it likewise has the ability to
decide not to recognize new gTLDs.  We do not believe
that ICANN is (nor should it be) under any unequivocal
mandate to expand the gTLD domain space regardless of
the effect on Internet stakeholders and the public at
large.  However, the draft strategy could be read to
assume such a mandate.  A measured, thoughtful
determination requires ICANN to assess whether the
addition of new domains is needed, or beneficial, at
any given time."

A good starting point for this discussion would
therefore be:  "is the introduction of new domains
currently needed or beneficial?"

In support of its position the CCDN states:
"For example, in its recent study, the Organization
Economic Co-operation and Development ("OECD")
examined the rate of adoption of domain names in the
newly created "open" gTLDs, .info, .biz, and .name,
and noted that while the numbers "suggest[] there is
some demand for new gTLDS [;]. . . [i]t has, however,
fallen well short of projections."  OECD, Working
Party on Telecommunication and Information
Services Policies, Generic Top Level Domain Names:
Market Development and Allocation Issues, at 28 (July
13, 2004), available at
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/56/34/32996948.pdf.  In
fact, the OECD report states a number of "cons" to the
introduction of new gTLDs, including the financial
burden business must assume to defensively register
domain names.  Id. at 34."

On the other side of the coin, in support of new TLDs
the OECD document also states:  

"Advantages of new generic Top Level Domain names --
One of the strongest arguments for opening the market
to a greater number of new gTLDs is for entities
wanting to create new services which they believe can
be best facilitated by using new gTLDs or
sTLDs. In ICANN?s first round of new gTLDs ?service
specific? proposals were not among the successful
candidates. That being said new services have emerged
under some of the new gTLDs. One example of a new
service, to date, is the fostering of international
domain names under .info. Another is the potential use
of .aero in connection with flight and airport
information. A prototype service was piloted from
October to November 2003 in Geneva. Users could type
in their flight number, expressed as a .aero URL and
directly access the information pertaining to the
flight number entered. Examples included:
http://BA723.aero or http://LX1751.aero.  While many
business users are opposed to the creation of new
gTLDs where the cost of defensive registrations would
outweigh the potential benefits, there is also support
amongst business for some new names where new business
opportunities are envisioned." 

While the OECD has its focus on business initiatives,
business considerations should remain but one of many
factors relative to a "need" for new TLDs.  


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>