Comments on: The end of .com, the beginning of .yourbrand http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/ Wed, 16 Nov 2016 01:37:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Pedro http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7335 Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:37:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7335 I think TLDs are liberal enough right now. Websites using .mobi, .biz, .tel, .info, etc. are rarely heard of (in my circles, anyway; I’d be happy to be corrected), and I think TLDs have already become a way of identifying the *kind* of organization that owns the website, not the name of the organization itself. That’s what the second-level domain name (the part before the TLD, like the “google” in “google.com”) is for.

What about this can’t be done with subdomains, or regular URLs? http://usa.toyota.com states very clearly that you’re visiting the USA site of the commercial entity Toyota.

What I’d like to see ICANN do is regulate the price of domain registration with the TLDs we already have, or open up the registering to make it more competitive. For example, there’s only one company you can buy a .pr (Puerto Rico’s country code) domain name from, and they charge an absolutely ridiculous $1000 USD per year. (https://www.nic.pr/fees_popup.asp?langu age=en) And push more for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs). Yes, you can get spoofed, but that’s happening now anyway, and displaying the URLs in punycode could help ameliorate the problem. I don’t think there would be a huge issue with people not being able to type out the special characters, since most of the new sites I visit are either through clicking a link or a Google search.

]]>
By: suryaden http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7141 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:59:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7141 so everybody will have a great domain and colourful internet naming, before and after the ‘dot’

]]>
By: drewbie http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7132 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:23:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7132 I think the concerns about who gets what are overstated. The examples of .apple and .memphis are the same issues we have now – who gets apple.com or memphis.com? The late comers will have to settle for longer ones like .applecomputers or .memphiszoo

There are always reservations when things change, but once the transition is done, pretty much everyone is happier.

]]>
By: Maria http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7130 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:45:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7130 I agree that the domain name extensions are great for users in the US. However, in other countries, they are not adopted, so for example, no university in Germany has an .edu extension and no government institution has a .gov. It is therefore really hard to find the real websites and to be sure, you are really looking at reliable information.

However, I also think that .whatever might not be a good idea, as you will strengthen the large corporations and the small companies will not have a shot at this option for a long time! I also agree with Swapna, who is to decide who will get ownership for this domain extension?

I believe it would create an unnecessary hype and give large conglomerates even more market power!

]]>
By: Swapna http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7114 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:37:39 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7114 I think the idea of .yourbrand is not a great idea. What is wrong with the current naming conventions (.org, .edu, .gov, .com, etc) which clearly define the domains and are self explanatory? I am perfectly fine with the way things are since my friend “Google” is always there to help me find what I intended for.

Like the article mentions, there are potential problems if two or more parties fight for the same name. Would .memphis be owned by University of Memphis or the Memphis Grizzlies or the Memphis zoo? In the example below if Apple the company gets the right for .apple and the Wisconsin co-operative does not, is that fair? If say, Apple goes bankrupt then should it be given to Wisconsin co-operative then?

I think there are a lot of open questions that need to be answered before opening up the registration process.

Lastly, but not the least I would miss using the Ctrl-Enter option in the address bar which automatically populates the .com and www if websites do not end in .com 😉

]]>
By: Dave http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7113 Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:34:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7113 ICANN is nuts.
It just needs to stop. One major problem with the internet is all the stupid extentions like.tv, .biz, ……whatever!!!…

it just leads to more and more confusion.
“.whatever” wont lead to massive rewrites and buys. Branding companies already know this… of course 1 or two may buy in.. but it will turn more consumers off than it will turn on. Good luck. idiots.

]]>
By: Orgizmo http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7109 Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:22:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7109 Well I think it would go a long way to resolving the issues of us running out of domain names anytime soon as well as protecting users from phishing websites. One thing that will need to be done is to price these new domain extensions so that people can register these instead of just large corporations.

76% of people can’t remember .com? That’s sad.

]]>
By: Surfer http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/09/29/the-end-of-com-the-beginning-of-yourbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-7105 Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:22:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3533#comment-7105 Interesting and promising.

]]>