World of Web Names Now Wide Open

Internet regulators voted to loosen restrictions on internet names, a move that could allow thousands of variations of suffixes beyond the basic .com or .ca. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) overwhelmingly approved the new guidelines on Thursday in Paris after weeklong meetings. The guidelines represent one of the biggest changes to the internet in its 25-year history.

New names won't begin appearing for several months and ICANN won't be deciding on specific ones. The organization must decide how much the new domain names will cost. The names are expected to cost over $100,000 apiece to help ICANN cover up to $20 million in costs. The new guidelines could allow for domain names that have been requested, and denied by ICANN, for years, such as .xxx for adult websites and .post for postal service websites. Companies with well-known names like eBay, Apple or Google could also end up requesting domain names if the new rules are approved, snatching up names like .ebay, .mac and .goog.

View: Full Story at CBC.ca

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Suddenly Jerry Yang needs Microsoft

Next Story

AMD expected to grab 40% discrete graphics card market share

27 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I actually feel this is going to make noob users even more vunerable to fake domains in emails...

People will be able to create domains such as "http://www.paypal.coms/............" and a lot of people wont notice and just click away.


(its not implemented yet... people should argue against this?)

maintaining TLDs is a hefty investment in infrastructure.
Your servers will be pounded relentlessly with requests to resolve names and registration of new domain names. And all the syncing stuff going on.

Get ready for a wave of www.ebay.ebay or www.google.google. If this decision reaches such extremes suffixes would lose all their meaning and purpose. Although I'm not sure myself what was the general goal of suffixes.

There will just be a load nonsense floating around with this.
And actually recognising these domains won't be straightforward. For example on TV or something, if i'm watching the "example show", and I see "example.com", then I know it's their website, but if it says something like "example.example", then i'll just think someone has made a typo on the show.

The main concern of this is that someone can just create a new TLD, such as .commerce (Yes, I know that's what .com means, but it's still a completely new TLD) and pretty much force all the big companies out there to have to buy their respective domains. So what if it costs $100,000 to create a domain, you could easily charge $1000 for google.commerce, Microsoft.commerce, etc. and be almost guaranteed they'd have to buy it.
It's more or less a legal way to domain squat, except you squat ALL domains in one go. It's a joke.

They should have just created more TLD's as they were needed - I rarely go to .biz, .info, .mobi or .tv domains as it is.

(Smigit said @ #13.1)
I fail to see why any company would "have" to buy into any of the new TLD's.

What's to stop Microsoft buying google.commerce and pointing it to their own servers?
Even if they got into legal crap over that, whats to stop some malware writer from buying paypal.commerce and harvesting username/passwords? The vast majority of people on the internet today don't know what an SSL certificate is.

(Kushan said @ #13.2)

What's to stop Microsoft buying google.commerce and pointing it to their own servers?
Even if they got into legal crap over that, whats to stop some malware writer from buying paypal.commerce and harvesting username/passwords? The vast majority of people on the internet today don't know what an SSL certificate is.

and so what if they did? I'm sure most users can spot the difference between Microsoft.com and microsoft.commerce. Hell I doubt 90% of web users even know "com" stands for commerce to begin with.

Besides, theres already enough top level TLD's that this could be an issue anyway and I really can't think of any examples where it has been besides a few small incidents where people have had to hand domains over for trademark reasons.

I really don't see the issue and theres really no reason a company needs every single combination of <company><dot><something>. Given how uncommonly used tld's besides com, net and org are theres even less reason to be concerned.

It might be confusing, i.started.something could be a URL, ending in .something. I wouldn't guess that right away.

I like typing in .com after many of the sites i visit, having to type in .goog or .mac would slow me down because then I can't just hit Ctrl-Enter to finish the URL. Not if these sites are all going to be switching to unique TLDs.. oh well.

And I wonder what the character limit is, typing anything over 4-5 is way too much. I thought URL's were supposed to be short, memorable, and possibly catchy.

While interesting... I'm just not sure if Joe-Average is going to get this. After all .Info and .Biz were decent additions to .com and yet there was not a big move to them. In fact the only one I know of, and use is www.mta.info for the subway/bus lines here in NYC.

But hey, I don't the new top level domains as a bad idea... we'll see.

oh great... just what we dont need, but I suppose it will make them money

Why cant google - just buy the right to "google" for some money and not bother with the whole top level domain...

Also most people just type what they want into search engines now anyway.... the importance of that brilliant domain is being lost.

They are referring to TLDs not domain names within the TLD

Like if you wanted .Gabe3 it would cost you $100,000, then you could charge others to have whatever.Gabe3

I appreciate your explanation because, to be honest, I didn't understand how the whole thing worked. Who "owns" .com then? Is it the ICANN?

(eiboodreyob said @ #2.1)
I appreciate your explanation because, to be honest, I didn't understand how the whole thing worked. Who "owns" .com then? Is it the ICANN?

Verisign owns the .com TLD

(Hannes.nz said @ #2.2)

Verisign owns the .com TLD

No, they're just in charge of maintaining it. If I recall correctly, this currently lasts until 2012 or something, nearer that time another company may come along and "outbid" Verisign for the privilege.