.Coke? .Nike? Internet Name Shake-Up Set for Monday

[Dusco25]

Brand owners will soon be able to operate their own parts of the Web -- such as .apple, .coke or .marlboro -- if the biggest shake-up yet in how Internet domains are awarded is approved.

After years of preparation and wrangling, ICANN, the body that coordinates Internet names, is expected to approve the move at a special board meeting in Singapore on Monday.

Today, just 22 generic top-level domains (gTLDs) exist -- .com, .org and .info are a few examples -- plus about 250 country-level domains like .uk or .cn. After the change, several hundred new gTLDs are expected to come into existence.

The move is seen as a big opportunity for brands to gain more control over their online presence and send visitors more directly to parts of their sites -- and a danger for those who fail to take advantage.

It will also change the way search engines like Google find results, and the way organizations use search-engine optimization to improve the visibility of their websites in search results.

"As a big brand, you ignore it at your peril," says Theo Hnarakis, chief executive of Australian domain name-registration firm Melbourne IT DBS, which advises companies and other organizations worldwide about how to do business online.

"We're advising people to buy their brands, park them and redirect visitors to their existing site, at the very least," says Hnarakis, whose more than 3,500 customers include Volvo, Lego and GlaxoSmithKline.

If the change is approved on Monday, applications are likely to open in January for a 90-day period before closing again, potentially for years.

It will cost $185,000 to apply, and individuals or organizations will have to show a legitimate claim to the name they are buying. ICANN is taking on hundreds of consultants to whom it will outsource the job of adjudicating claims.

"The commercial participants are the most active, aggressive and articulate members of our society," ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom told Reuters in a recent interview, saying trademark owners in particular were anxious about how the new regime would work.

As well as big brands, organizations such as cities or other communities are expected to apply.

GTLDs such as .nyc, .london or .food could provide opportunities for many smaller businesses to grab names no longer available at the .com level -- like bicycles.london or indian.food.

The new domains will also change how ICANN works, as it will have a role in policing how gTLDs are operated, bought and sold. Until now, it has overseen names and performed some other tasks but has been little involved in the Internet's thornier issues.

To prevent so-called cyber-squatting, gTLD owners will be expected to maintain operational sites. ICANN will have to approve transfers to new owners at the top level.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/17/coke-nike-internet-name-shake-up-set-for-monday/#ixzz1PmTsZcFx

[P!P]

GTLDs such as .nyc, .london or .food could provide opportunities for many smaller businesses to grab names no longer available at the .com level -- like bicycles.london or indian.food.

It's stupid though. Who really wants bicycles.london or indian.food? Those types of domains always sell for a ton but never really get used. I mean domains like google.com and yahoo.com are among the most popular and their domains say nothing about what they are. Would search.internet go for a lot? Probably and it probably never get used. I don't know, it just seems dumb.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

Sounds like this will be a mess.

[Ayepecks]

Sounds like this will be a mess.

Not when you take into account how much it costs just to apply ($185,000), plus the fact that there's a $25,000 yearly fee.

[Raa]

I can see the confusion : "Our website is www.coke" "Uhh, is that with .com?" :laugh:

[Ji@nBing]

What, exactly is the point? .com, .net, ect... seem to be working just fine. Do we really need one for every little brand?!?!?

[SharpGreen]

How about .stupid? Oh that one's taken already, by this idea.

[Ayepecks]

What, exactly is the point? .com, .net, ect... seem to be working just fine. Do we really need one for every little brand?!?!?

You're not going to see this except for major companies, as the cost is a major barrier. So it may be something like "diet.coke" for Coke to show off its product lines, or "sports.ea".

[Alladaskill17]

I think this is a stupid idea as well; just wanted to add my point of view :)

[Stetson]

Seems especially silly since most people don't even really understand domain names and everything seems to be moving away from caring about the actual domain name.

Sure Coke might like to own the "coke" TLD, but already you can just type "coke" into the address bar and either the browser auto-adds the ".com" or it gives you a search results page with the site you're looking for as one of the first few results.

[Ci7]

seems to be a waste of money

[BryanChung]

.facebook .twitter .bryanchung

(Y)

[articuno1au]

It's ICANN's version of micro-transaction business models :p

A mere $185,000 + $25,000 a year and you can own your own cool hat :o

[Calum Veteran]

Many people don't seem to understand this. Ayepecks has got it spot on.

A lot of companies can no longer obtain the domain name they'd like with the .com top-level domain (TDL) because it has been taken. Also, now, instead of AkbarsIndianRestaurant.com, it can be AkbarsIndian.restaurant, or AkbarsIndian.food. TheKillersMusic.com is an actual website; they would now be able to have TheKillers.music. These kind of domain names make perfect sense, and seeing as there are many types of company, a lot with similar names but different company types, this expansion really does make sense.

For myself, I really wish they would bring back the .um TDL. It's so frustrating they got rid of it just because it wasn't being used that much. Seeing as I am unable to have www.callum.net or www.callum.me, I could have had www.call.um or something similar :D The fact I cannot have www.callum.[something] means I'm all for this idea; I just hope some of the TDLs in this expansion are as cheap as the average domain name tends to be, and that they're not all hundreds of thousands of pounds.

It's stupid though. Who really wants bicycles.london or indian.food? Those types of domains always sell for a ton but never really get used. I mean domains like google.com and yahoo.com are among the most popular and their domains say nothing about what they are. Would search.internet go for a lot? Probably and it probably never get used. I don't know, it just seems dumb.

Not many people would want Indian.food (perhaps), but as I have pointed out above, Akbar might wish to have AkbarsIndian.food, instead of AkbarsIndianFood.com. Not only that, but AkbarsIndianFood.com could be taken (it isn't, but my point is a .com website someone would like is likely already taken nowadays).

I can see the confusion : "Our website is www.coke" "Uhh, is that with .com?" :laugh:

I do believe the companies still have to use a TDL, so it would have to be www.coke.[something]. As Ayepecks pointed out, Coke could nicely have www.diet.coke.

[BryanChung]

Internet body approves new web suffixes

SINGAPORE - A GLOBAL body that charts the course of the Internet voted on Monday to allow the creation of new website domain suffixes by private companies, members said.

The board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) voted in favour of the proposal at a meeting in Singapore despite fears that opening up new suffixes based on corporate brands could cause some confusion.

'This is the biggest change to domain names since the creation of dotcom 26 years ago,' said Theo Hnarakis, chief executive of Melbourne IT Digital Brand Services, a California-based company that provides online branding services. -- AFP

Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/TechandScience/Story/STIStory_681842.html

[The_Observer]

who gets the 185,000$

[Brian Miller]

It's cheaper to get a trademark and prevent others using it for a domain name.

$185,000 is just ridiculous.

[Fish]

The TLD is becoming mostly irrelevant though, due to the power of modern search engines. Sure, having a ".food" or ".coke" is going to please the board of directors, but for millions of normal, everyday internet users, if you don't know the URL, you'll just Google the brand name anyway.

[Paul Ferson Veteran]

I'm agreeing with Fish. For the most part, these new domains aren't going to do anything for the end-user when they're not sure what they are. People are still going to use the .com domain that they've tried and trusted over time, and the unique new domains are going to cost a huge amount, while doing a relatively minor job of gaining traffic. I don't like the idea much, but I don't see it being a really bad thing either. It'll open up some domains for people, like what Callum already pointed out.

[Syanide]

Many people don't seem to understand this. Ayepecks has got it spot on.

A lot of companies can no longer obtain the domain name they'd like with the .com top-level domain (TDL) because it has been taken. Also, now, instead of AkbarsIndianRestaurant.com, it can be AkbarsIndian.restaurant, or AkbarsIndian.food. TheKillersMusic.com is an actual website; they would now be able to have TheKillers.music. These kind of domain names make perfect sense, and seeing as there are many types of company, a lot with similar names but different company types, this expansion really does make sense.

<snipped>

And what you seem to fail to understand is that this is simply going to create more mess. Why? Because it is legally possible for two businesses to have identical trademarks on names if they operate in different branches. Who gets their own TLD in that case (besides the one that's stupid enough to pay this amount of money)? This will not clean up any mess, this is going to create more.

Basically, this is ICANN's way of making easy cash, and nothing more. There's nothing else to possibly justify this move.

[Calum Veteran]

And what you seem to fail to understand is that this is simply going to create more mess. Why? Because it is legally possible for two businesses to have identical trademarks on names if they operate in different branches. Who gets their own TLD in that case (besides the one that's stupid enough to pay this amount of money)? This will not clean up any mess, this is going to create more.

Basically, this is ICANN's way of making easy cash, and nothing more. There's nothing else to possibly justify this move.

I'm well aware of the disadvantages, but I think the advantages far outweigh those. I know this expansion is for organisations only, but while developing my own personal website, I've realised just how frustrating it is not to be able to have the domain name one desires.

[e-berlin.org]

I wanna buy http://snorting.coke/

[Growled Member]

Sounds like the Internet is going to get a lot more interesting in the next few years.