1 / 17

Releasing restrictions on very short domain names CENTR L&R Presentation Paris 24 September 2010

Releasing restrictions on very short domain names CENTR L&R Presentation Paris 24 September 2010. Agenda. What’s it all about? Some case studies What have we learnt? Nominet’s next steps Q&A. What’s all about?. Historically very short domain names have been a Bad Idea

thimba
Download Presentation

Releasing restrictions on very short domain names CENTR L&R Presentation Paris 24 September 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Releasing restrictions on very short domain namesCENTR L&R PresentationParis24 September 2010

  2. Agenda What’s it all about? Some case studies What have we learnt? Nominet’s next steps Q&A

  3. What’s all about? • Historically very short domain names have been a Bad Idea • TLDs (3 letter gTLDs and 2 letter ccTLDs) • com.TLD • uk.TLD • Two letters which are not a ccTLD • vw.TLD • One character • 1.TLD • z.TLD • Why?

  4. Technical concerns • "[it] appears that the original purpose for reserving the single characters was driven by technical concerns (GNSO's Reserved Names Working Group Final Report, 23 May 2007) • These are no longer applicable and these restrictions should not apply to new gTLDs and that those currently reserved in existing gTLDs should be released • The resolver problem: • Old resolvers would potentially risk reading • [unregistered].com as [unregistered].com.co.uk • Potential for misdirection of large amounts of nameserver traffic

  5. So many problems ... • Technical problems • Future expansion? • ISO list not fixed in stone • Who to give them to? • Prudent to reserve/ block • Stability and security of Internet naming and addressing is the top priority

  6. Fast forward to today • Technical problems (mostly) resolved • New TLDs: the rule against TLD.TLD is broken and cannot practically be applied retrospectively • E.g. pro.TLD, aero.TLD, museum.TLD etc • Big new expansion of new gTLDs on the horizon • Exceptions will be the rule unless it is changed • Legal disputes • vw.de litigation • Consensus building to change the policy • But what have other registries done?

  7. Case study #1: Denic • Dropped all restrictions on 5 days’ notice following failure of vw.de case appeal • 23 October 2009 • First come, first served • Registration requests limited to reduce system demand and give all Denic members a level playing field • The result? • Tec-Media-Service reported to have pooled the quotas for 20-30 Denic registrars and grabbed 28% of all the one and two letter domains

  8. Case study #1: Denic

  9. Case study #1: Denic • SEDO set up a market place for domains • Some high bids: • TV.de (€279,499) • PC.de (€158,700) • DE.de (€144,277 • But SEDO did not get hold of these to sell

  10. Case study #2: .biz • Agreed a variation of its registry agreement with ICANN • Marketing programme for the release of 1 and 2 character domains commenced 1 June 2009 • Release process: • “Request for proposal” for applicants to provide specific plans for use and promotion • Auction the rest • Then FCFS • But did not release the 2 letter country codes • Some good prices reported: e.biz ($66,001), but typical two character less than $1,000

  11. Case study #3: .co • Rules state that domains must be 3 or more characters • But premium domains auctioned during their sunrise • o.co reportedly bought by Overstock for $350,000 • Also e.co, t.co etc as part of the marketing drive for the launch

  12. Case study #4: .net • Verisign has applied to ICANN for the removal of restrictions on 1 and 2 character .net and indicated the same in due course for .com • To be auctioned off, proceeds to promote “the general awareness of .net” • Normal registrations EXCEPT they will not be generally available if not renewed but will be re-auctioned at a later date • “VeriSign is not hereby proposing a release of .com single and/or two character domain names. VeriSign anticipates that any such proposal will be structured differently than the proposal for .net and will include use of proceeds from any auction for the benefit of the general Internet community.”

  13. What have we learnt? • The technical issues no longer exist • There is huge demand, as evidenced by some of the prices • Release processes vary, there is no easy solution • There can be significant windfalls, how should these be applied and should there be a public benefit test?

  14. What is Nominet doing? • Extensive public consultation • Outreach to the holders of trade marks • Try to identify any community consensus and genuine objections • What’s a fair release process in line with Nominet’s public benefit requirements • Presumption to remove any rules unless there is a remaining valid technical problem or a sound policy reason

  15. Nominet’s conclusions • To remove the restrictions on • TLDs • 2 letters • Single characters • To retain the restrictions on • UK • COM • UK SLDs (14 of these including co, org, net, ac, me, gov, police, mod, nhs etc)

  16. Sunrise requirements • Rights cut off 1 January 2008 • Registered trade marks first, then unregistered trade marks • Requirement for bona fide use of a trade mark, not just registration • Landrush decided by auction, then unrestricted • Standard registration terms apply • Where there is more than one applicant in the sunrise then open auction is the decider • If the release process generates a profit then we will donate that to the Nominet Trust • Starts December 2010

  17. Q&A

More Related