Re: [ga] Comment Submitted on .biz, .info, and .org contracts
Danny Younger wrote: The registry operators of .biz, .info and .org deserve to have the same contract with ICANN that is provided to these other gTLD sponsoring organizations. I very much disagree. I have several domain names in .com (Verisign) and .org (PIR) that have been there since well before there was a Network Solutions or a Verisign or and ICANN. Because of the recognition value that I have built into those names I am, as a practical matter, trapped in those TLDs. I did not voluntarily accept their terms and conditions except to the degree that I could have avoided them only by not using the internet of that time at all. So I need and deserve protection against the organizations that now operates .com and .org. Now, those people in .biz and .info at least had a choice - not much of a choice, but a choice none the less. As did people who came into .com and .org at a later time. To the degree that one can believe that .com, .biz, .org, and .info today are really in competition and really offer significantly different products then we can say that today's customers have a choice. Now, I don't believe that they really offer different products - ICANN's rules really make all of the name products essentially the same with only cosmetic differences (see my plans for .ewe to see how things could be really different - http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000159.html ) But nevertheless, those of us trapped in .com, because we had no alternative, deserve to be protected against Verisign. The same can not be said, at least not to the same degree, about those who chose the newer TLDs. And in the future, if ICANN were to allow really different TLDs with really different business models and product characteristics, then that would create yet another tier of people who require even less protection those who are in today's .biz and .info. Ah, the mess that ICANN has created. --karl--
|