[At-Large] Thoughts on Delaying New gTLDs

[Evan Leibovitch]

Bret Fausett wrote:
> > The idea that there are tiny language groups hanging around saying "oh,
> > if only we had a TLD then we would do all sorts of Internet stuff" is
> > rather implausible.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "tiny language groups," but I had in 
> mind languages like Chinese.
I think John was referring to most of the entries at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.cym#Language_and_community

In Paris I attended a reception staged by proponents of .bzh , and at 
the gala of the Cairo meeting I shared a table with the delegation 
pushing for .cym -- the points of view of both groups of TLD advocates 
were astoundingly similar.

Most non-Europeans would have to look them up to even know that .cym is 
for Welsh language culture and .bzh is for the Brittany area of France.
The efforts are very real, and issues of pride and cultural survival 
appear to be overriding mundane concerns such as business models and 
long-term stability. There seems to be a sincere -- but ill-advised, IMO 
belief that a cultural TLD will offer a technology haven in which 
native-language and cultural websites will be able to flourish, or at 
least slow down assimilation.

> And I don't think anyone claims that TLDs enable Internet access or 
> the creation of Internet content, but they may enable identity and 
> branding and ease of communication, for IDNs.
Such claims exist. Usually, as I've heard them, they take the form that 
a native TLD would facilitate the assertion of identity, at very least 
by making it easier to get relevant native-language domain names through 
explicit anti-squatter policies. As an example, consider that the Welsh 
word for "Wales" is "Cymru (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/cymru/), yet 
"cymru.com" (despite its Welsh dragon logo) points to an American IT 
security form and "cymru.org" is unused but owned (according to WHOIS 
data) by someone in Switzerland. There may be a feeling that cultural 
identity is being hijacked, without the trademark protections offered to 
commercial interests or the reserved phrases requested by governments.

The feeling is real and in some cases justified. But this of course begs 
the question of whether the answer is creation of a TLD for every 
national cultural/linguistic minority. Most current efforts share the 
wishful thinking that their TLD will also be valued (and domain 
registrations purchased) by their respective diasporas (ie, North 
Americans of Welsh background).

I can't see any of these TLDs attracting more than a few thousand 
registrations and in some cases even that is optimistic. I almost wish 
that there was a single TLD, let's say ".nation" for instance, under 
which all of these could be placed.... maybe then there would be enough 
volume to sustain a stable TLD and reasonably priced domains.

The new gTLD plans make specific mention of these "cultural" TLDs; by 
encouraging and not dissuading their creation, arguably ICANN could be 
seen to be exploiting cultural pride in order to gain the revenue from 
the new registrations.

> > new TLDs may exist mostly to shake down existing registrants who'd want
> > defensive registrations in new domains.
>
> Every executive at a registry or prospective registry I know thinks 
> defensive registrations are one of the worst things for their 
> business, because they tie up quality names in the hands of people who 
> don't use them or simply redirect them to the .COM. It is awful 
> advertising for your namespace if most instances of it redirect to a 
> .COM. Believe it or not, the goal is *not* to sell to the existing 
> .COM registrants. If I am .WEB or .INFO or something, I'd much rather 
> have the Idaho Butter Manufacturers actually use IBM.WEB than let 
> International Business Machines register it defensively.
The goal for some TLDs is to maximize revenue as a business model. They 
don't care who owns IBM.<tld> so long as it's taken. Of course, 
defensive registrations don't have to happen. Does IBM really need 
ibm.<everything>? In the case of ccTLDs they may be seen like virtual 
branch offices, and there may be special purpose ones (like.mobi) make 
sense. But the trademark owners can do at least as much as registries to 
curb defensive registrations.

- Evan