.UK Announced

[Nigel]

Perphaps if you have the strenght left, follow up and ask for clarification on the issues she raised compared to the previous answers Nominet have provided on these issues ?

Yes - I've got the strength - plus a couple of other questions

 

[Stephen]

.co.uk is a great place to be?

Yes - I've got the strength - plus a couple of other questions

Great keep us posted.

I have failed in getting the face of .co.uk, Jonathon Jones, the Commercial Director at tregothnan.co.uk to enter the debate sadly.

They are the company used to show how ".co.uk is a great place to be".

I advised him about the .uk proposal before Christmas, I don't believe until then he knew of the .uk Nominet proposal but after a few emails he has stated they don't have a view on .uk at this time?

 

[markb]

How do you think nominet would need to change the proposal so that the majority of people are happy with direct.uk ? Here are my thoughts :

1. Nominet should state exactly what the .uk domain names should be used for and who they should be used by. We already know .co.uk domains are for businesses who trade online, .org.uk for charities and .me.uk for personal websites. Bringing out .uk without a specific use, or the same use as an existing domain extension is only going to cause confusion in the UK name space.

2. If .uk is for businesses. Ensure existing .co.uk domain owners have first chance at buying the corresponding .uk domain. This is so businesses are confident that they wont lose out on their domain and there won't be any domain squatters trying to cash in on your online business. If trademark owners dont already own the .co.uk , dont let them buy the .uk, as this would only cause confusion for the existing .co.uk owner and the trademark owner as they would be trading on confusingly similar domain names.

3. If the new security features where to go ahead on the .uk domains. Before this happens, the same security features MUST be made on all existing uk domain names including .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk

4. Bring the price down of the new .uk domains down in line with existing uk domain names. Maybe all uk domain prices should be increased slightly to accommodate the new security features and checks.

 

[TinkyWinky]

How do you think nominet would need to change the proposal so that the majority of people are happy with direct.uk ? Here are my thoughts :

Bin it... that is the only way they will get the majority of people to agree.

But then will the majority of existing UK domain owners ever know about this proposal until it has gone through... errr.... never!

If you are asking how will they get the majority of those that know about the proposal to agree to allow .UK - then that starts to get in to the ways in which you can manipulate statistics.

If they came up with a really good reason why the direct.UK extension is actually NEEDED, then that may be a good starting point. Seeing as they can't, then it's a defunct argument in my view.

 

[Stephen]

A way forward...

How do you think nominet would need to change the proposal so that the majority of people are happy with direct.uk ? Here are my thoughts

To join in your idea, I would counter suggest, the process should be looked at not just the introduction of .uk (or its non-introduction):

1. Nominet gets opinions about alternatives and considers there pros and cons as they clearly did not do that with current .uk proposal
2. Either to choose to address other issues e.g. security for the whole of the UK namespace at the same time or keep it simple about .uk only
3. When Nominet have concluded launch a full consultation of all registrants and interested parties should take place, explaining the pros and cons of any proposal.

Regarding .uk itself:

1. Link/pair to ownership of .co.uk and those that wish to move over can when they want to but can only use either .co.uk or .uk. This will not push problems down the line for future users and consumers.
2. Don't have any other features on .uk - its attraction is it is shorter

Nominet should also consider:

1. Having separate research stage, gather opinion about what will make the the entire UK namespace more secure
2. Gather opinion and suggestions on how to adapt the UK namespace to the new ICANN gTLD's and the changing world of domain usage
3. Nominet should have a post mortem to see how it got in such a mess with .uk and make changes to prevent such a mistake (the way .uk has been handled) from happening again

Regarding your suggestion, I would comment on:

1. Nominet should state exactly what the .uk domain names should be used for and who they should be used by. We already know .co.uk domains are for businesses who trade online, .org.uk for charities and .me.uk for personal websites. Bringing out .uk without a specific use, or the same use as an existing domain extension is only going to cause confusion in the UK name space.

Nominet cannot and should not dictate what the domain should be used for at the second level, that is part of the problem now with .uk.
They unilaterally decided the .uk was another business namespace that was more secure.
If it was a third level and the tld showed what it was far then it is possible
to show/explain what its intended use (but NOT at the 2nd level) e.g. .app.uk for apps for mobile devices etc. that would be an entirely different situation.

2. If .uk is for businesses. Ensure existing .co.uk domain owners have first chance at buying the corresponding .uk domain. This is so businesses are confident that they wont lose out on their domain and there won't be any domain squatters trying to cash in on your online business. If trademark owners dont already own the .co.uk , dont let them buy the .uk, as this would only cause confusion for the existing .co.uk owner and the trademark owner as they would be trading on confusingly similar domain names.

This is at a point in time, a plan should create a long term structure.
The suggestion to work would require everybody will know about it,
everybody will understand the long term significance of domain ownership
and there will be no future entrants into UK namespace.

3. If the new security features where to go ahead on the .uk domains. Before this happens, the same security features MUST be made on all existing uk domain names including .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk

Agree but would like to see more debate and expert opinion and opinions from consumer groups what makes a more secure UK namespace (and what rules if any should/could apply to other tld's being used to UK consumers).

4. Bring the price down of the new .uk domains down in line with existing uk domain names. Maybe all uk domain prices should be increased slightly to accommodate the new security features and checks.

There does not need to be any price on .uk if linked to .co.uk as the technical costs would not even dent the current Nominet annual surplus.

Regarding the security costs then it will depend on what is decided to benefit the entire UK namespace but transparency of cost v benefit should also be part of the process. Currently Nominet have said what is the breakdown of the £20, to see if each element is offering value for money.

Right I'm off to play in the snow!!!

 

[Nigel]

I agree the only way forward is to BIN IT

charities and non-profit organisations will always object to themselves being relegated should direct.uk proceed. And I have some sympathy with them. That's why Nominet came up with the ludicrous idea of making direct.uk a designated business domain but then said .org.uk registrants and even .me.uk registrants have equal rights to the new domain

 

[jimmc]

I'd like to publish the email I sent to Nominet on the 6th, would this be an issue?

 

[monaghan]

If the attraction of direct.uk that it is shorter and that is sufficient to mess up the whole .uk namespace, then what is the attraction for dot london as it is longer?

 

[Stephen]

If the attraction of direct.uk that it is shorter and that is sufficient to mess up the whole .uk namespace, then what is the attraction for dot london as it is longer?

That is why there needs to be a debate as I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't want .uk at all. Although I thinkl if Nominet suspend the decision on .uk it will be damaging to all UK domains and its future development, due to the uncertainity.

.LONDON is not under the control of Nominet, it is the London Mayor and it is a pity Nominet did mot lobby them to use .london.uk, (saving over £1 m) although there would be issues with .co.uk owners who already had "London" in the domain string, it would have at least been in the control of Nominet to protect those UK namespace owners, hopefully without auctions.

 

[monaghan]

I'm aware that .london is non Nominet, my point was that the demand for short domains can't be that high up in the "public perception" otherwise long strings like .london would not be so appealing.

I'd be more in favour of a xxx.town/city.uk or a xxx.profession.uk. smithsplumbers.croydon.uk or smithscroydon.plumber.uk would be far clearer to the general public and I really can't see what all the fuss is about over saving a few characters in the URL.

 

[Blossom]

I'm aware that .london is non Nominet, my point was that the demand for short domains can't be that high up in the "public perception" otherwise long strings like .london would not be so appealing.

Are they appealing though? I don't find it appealing in the slightest. Probably because I don't work on a local level. Of course I can see how place=specific extensions are useful for local businesses, but isn't the majority (money-wise and people-wise) focused more at national and international level?

I really can't see what all the fuss is about over saving a few characters in the URL.

Twitter, printing costs, signs, mobile users, people's memories...

 

[Nigel]

.uk registrar conference 2012

I've finally got round to watching this mammoth video kindly posted on the forum by Foz back on 27 Nov. Really interesting info so far particularly on the questions as to why Nominet didn't contact 10m registrants - also their market research - which they said would not be made available.

But I've just come across something at around 42 mins in that has made my blood boil. This was during a questions session. An 'Olly' (I can't quite decipher his second name - if anyone knows please let me know) stood up and didn't ask a question. He instead made a statement that he was from Host Europe inc Webfusion, Domainmonster and Heart Internet. He said 'we have been doing our own polls' and the answer is 'overwhelmingly yes' for a .uk.

As a Heart Internet customer who spent a five figure sum last year you would have expected our company to have been included in any poll. So what sort of a poll was it? and who was consulted? I will be writing to HostEurope's CEO Thomas Vollrath to find out. I see he is one of the Board Members who will consider direct.uk next month. Found his email address on his nominet election address - here: http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/58325_Nominet_Election_-_2012.pdf
Were any Heart customers (I know there are quite a few on here) asked to take part in any poll? Maybe you'll also want to drop Mr Vollrath a line.

Here is the link to the nominet .uk registrar conference again.
http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/events/events-meetings/uk-registrar-conference

 

[Stephen]

confusion.uk.co?

I've had an interesting conversation today about how certain people within Nominet are alleged to have used pressure to get .uk.co banned because they believed it was confusingly similar to .co.uk

If it's true then it smacks of hypocrisy.

Do you know where you can buy a .uk.co (3rd elvel) as it might make a nice site name eg. confusion.uk.co for a second round fight if nominet launch .uk without taking account of the views of the many?

 

[Whois-Search]

Do you know where you can buy a .uk.co (3rd elvel) as it might make a nice site name eg. confusion.uk.co for a second round fight if nominet launch .uk without taking account of the views of the many?

.uk.co got shut down in 2003:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/02/20/uk_co_killed_by_colombian

Today Bob Fox runs www.bb-online.co.uk

 

[markb]

I was just looking at a page on the agreatpacetobe website below which described what each uk domain extension is used for. I wonder what nominet plan to use direct.uk for?

http://www.agreatplacetobe.co.uk/which-uk/

 

[websaway]

I was just looking at a page on the agreatpacetobe website below which described what each uk domain extension is used for. I wonder what nominet plan to use direct.uk for?

http://www.agreatplacetobe.co.uk/which-uk/

This has for me been the crux of the matter from day one.
It is of course a case of selling the business/corporate space for a second time, but they are hoping to cloak it in the issue of security so it's not so audatious and rely on the vast sums of income involved to drive it through.

 

[Stephen]

I was just looking at a page on the agreatpacetobe website below which described what each uk domain extension is used for. I wonder what nominet plan to use direct.uk for?

http://www.agreatplacetobe.co.uk/which-uk/

When asked this directly and in writing they state:

This is only a consultation and we have not decided what marketing we would do after the introduction of .uk,
so no decision has been made on what we would say about each UK extension.​

 

[markb]

This has for me been the crux of the matter from day one.
It is of course a case of selling the business/corporate space for a second time, but they are hoping to cloak it in the issue of security so it's not so audatious and rely on the vast sums of income involved to drive it through.

I think this is the main reason everyone who knows about the proposals feels cheated. Nominet are just tring to resell the business space a second time with no guarantee's existing businesses will be able to buy their own space.

If the issue really is about security, then come on Nominet, prove it and make the existing uk domains secure.

If the issue is that you wished you had brought out shorter domains orginally, i.e. .uk instead of .co.uk, then replace the .co.uk domains with the .uk domains. This could be done gradually over time.

 

[markb]

When asked this directly and in writing they state:

This is only a consultation and we have not decided what marketing we would do after the introduction of .uk,
so no decision has been made on what we would say about each UK extension.​

What kind of answer is that? They will obviously try to make a use up, like ".uk can be used by any business, charity or individual person, as long as they are from the UK".

 

[websaway]

What kind of answer is that? They will obviously try to make a use up, like ".uk can be used by any business, charity or individual person, as long as they are from the UK".

Another thought that occurs to me is that in the past most restrictions that are placed on domains fall by the wayside after time when it becomes impractical to police.
So eventually this would just become a .uk extension and Nominet would sell as many as they could regardless.

Not for profit organisation, they must be living on another planet.