.UK Announced

[Sound]

- Who got around the TM timeouts (remembering Scott Jones in particular, Nominet were happy, their lawyers were happy, even we were happy!)

Not everyone was happy people should return and look at this thread http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/whois/87135-questioning-registered-rights-tm-stage.html makes very interesting reading.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Personally, I've already drawn up my list of TM free names I expect to go to landrush, no doubt the smart ones here too will have done the same, because untimately Nominet WILL get this through, so if you can't beat them, you may as well join them.

That is as good a reason as many that I have seen as to why the opening up of .uk should not go ahead as currently proposed.

 

[TinkyWinky]

Aegean : For me personally, It does look like domainers trying to protect their own investments, rather than any genuine objection to an inevitable improvement of the UK domain name system. Sorry but thats how it seems, not one argument I have seen makes any sense in the business world.

So what's the "inevitable improvement"?

If Nominet could actually provide a REAL improvement to the online experience, then why not try and firstly apply these changes to existing domain extensions like .co.uk or .org.uk?

UK residency - pah... what a load of cobblers.

Nominet should be made (legally I am talking) to PROVE there is a benefit, which then every single domain holder in the UK has an opportunity to vote on. So far to date, they haven't and seem hell bent on trying to impose what they feel is in everyone's (members, public, businesses) interests ('in the name of progress').

I will still put on record that I feel it is certain individuals driving this in order to create a legacy and 'honour'.. someone please prove me wrong.

All any of us NEED to do is to find the legal or membership loophole that stops this in it's tracks - saving all of us a lot of time and effort trying to stop what is plainly an ill-conceived "mumbo jumbo" of a proposal.

TW

 

[anthony]

That is as good a reason as many that I have seen as to why the opening up of .uk should not go ahead as currently proposed.

What reason? Do you have a problem with people doing this if it is within the rules? If people are looking to register domains correctly, it has greater merit that seeing Nominet effectively selling the crop in 1,000s of drummed up auctions!

 

[Hazel Pegg]

What reason? Do you have a problem with people doing this if it is within the rules?

I'd prefer that .uk wasn't opened up at all but if it is then I don't want to see the secondary market able to exploit any loopholes. Of which there appear to be many. But then my politics are slightly to the left of Karl Marx and I view Domainers in much the same way as I view buy-to-let landlords. Not doing anything illegal but not adding anything to society as a whole. And in some cases actively harming society as a whole.

So if the whole .uk bag of worms is opened up then I would like to see *much* greater protection for existing registrants of .co.uk domains who are using those domains as an online element of their primary offline business. With the same protection given to businesses who operate solely online on the condition that their business isn't hoarding domain names for resale. What I don't want to see is SMEs losing out to Brand Squatters or Domainers because they either can't get the .uk version of their .co.uk or don't even realise that they should try to until it is too late.

I accept that won't be a popular point of view on this forum.

 

[GreyWing]

What reason? Do you have a problem with people doing this if it is within the rules? If people are looking to register domains correctly, it has greater merit that seeing Nominet effectively selling the crop in 1,000s of drummed up auctions!

Those were different in my opinion as the only ones left to look stupid were Nominet for being out smarted, there was nobody on pc.co.uk to lose out. This time it is different because the losers of Nominet being out smarted will be some poor chap who has the .co.uk and will technically end up having to pay a ransom to get someone off their lawn.

I have no doubt domainers will be very happy at the chance at this opportunity and the loop holes it will bring. Those people who run genuine businesses off them are the ones who will lose out to brand dilution and leakage.

 

[anthony]

I'd prefer that .uk wasn't opened up at all but if it is then I don't want to see the secondary market able to exploit any loopholes. Of which there appear to be many. But then my politics are slightly to the left of Karl Marx and I view Domainers in much the same way as I view buy-to-let landlords. Not doing anything illegal but not adding anything to society as a whole. And in some cases actively harming society as a whole.

So if the whole .uk bag of worms is opened up then I would like to see *much* greater protection for existing registrants of .co.uk domains who are using those domains as an online element of their primary offline business. With the same protection given to businesses who operate solely online on the condition that their business isn't hoarding domain names for resale. What I don't want to see is SMEs losing out to Brand Squatters or Domainers because they either can't get the .uk version of their .co.uk or don't even realise that they should try to until it is too late.

I accept that won't be a popular point of view on this forum.

Actually, I agree with all of what you have said, the five generic domains on my list relate directly to my area of business, and nothing else. All are without TMs, and all of the current .co.uk versions of these names are held by well know (Nominet member) domainers right now. I have offered £x,xxx to high £1x,xxx for at least 4 of them over the years, and have been unsuccessful in getting any, so for me, this opportunity, however small, is one I do intend to prepare for, come what may!

It is certainly nothing to do with being a 'Brand Squatter' or 'Domainer', and it is arrogant of you to imply that I am one without knowing me, my business, my experiences trying to buy the current names, and my plans to use the .uks in the unlikely event that I secure one!

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Those people who run genuine businesses off them are the ones who will lose out to brand dilution and leakage.

That is my primary concern. People have built up businesses over years and have an online presence using whatever .co.uk domain they could register. Businesses have invested in their online identity and now may be about to see confusion, brand dilution and leakage.

The secondary market exists and if a business wants to pay a domainer for xxxxx.co.uk then that's business. But that is very different to Nominet opening up a new (marketed as superior) .uk extension that will cause problems for those who believed Nominet when they said agreatplacetobe.co.uk

 

[Edwin]

Hazel, I'm afraid it's all or nothing. Either .uk devalues all .co.uk domains or it doesn't.

If it does (which I certainly believe it will) and Nominet decides to redress the injustice by giving .co.uk owners first dibs, they should do so across the board. Domain investors will see exactly the same impact on their holdings as any other type of business.

Should a distinction be made, that's just introducing a different kind of iniquity into the process and I believe we're all fighting Nominet precisely because what they're proposing is unfair. To fight to instigate a different unfairness is a losing cause even before you begin.

Nominet are a formidable opponent. We need to focus on the areas we agree on (their proposal is wrong, .uk is wrong) not on what we differ on if we're to have any chance at all at derailing their money-grab! The rest clouds the picture and gifts them a wedge with which to split the opposition.

 

[Stephen]

.....
The secondary market exists and if a business wants to pay a domainer for xxxxx.co.uk then that's business. But that is very different to Nominet opening up a new (marketed as superior) .uk extension that will cause problems for those who believed Nominet when they said agreatplacetobe.co.uk

Totally agree!

 

[Hazel Pegg]

It is certainly nothing to do with being a 'Brand Squatter' or 'Domainer', and it is arrogant of you to imply that I am one without knowing me, my business, my experiences trying to buy the current names, and my plans to use the .uks in the unlikely event that I secure one!

I guess that your comment that "if you can't beat them, you may as well join them" led me to a possibly incorrect assumption.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Hazel, I'm afraid it's all or nothing. Either .uk devalues all .co.uk domains or it doesn't.

Some people might argue that there is already a value difference between .co.uk names in active use and those stashed in virtual display cupboards (or out there as PPC sites).

 

[Stephen]

.uk paired ownership with .co.uk

....You're spot on though in that just by starting the process, Nominet has guaranteed that ALL outcomes will be worse than the 1 October 2012 status quo.

Currently trying to work on alternative solutions on .uk and how the uk namespace will look afterwards.

Does anybody please have any views, advantages and disadvantages to the following;

"the .uk ownership is paired to the .co.uk ownership for all time, for the exact same domain name."

Rgds
stephen

 

[GreyWing]

Currently trying to work on alternative solutions on .uk and how the uk namespace will look afterwards.

Does anybody please have any views, advantages and disadvantages to the following;

"the .uk ownership is paired to the .co.uk ownership for all time, for the exact same domain name."

Rgds
stephen

There is no argument against a migration to .uk from .co.uk in my opinion. Keep the .co.uk active but resolve to .uk for 4-5 years like they did with the digital tv system. Anyone that types in .co.uk into a browser just gets redirected to .uk. No confusion at all, no costs in changing stationary or ad campaigns. That would cost Nominet around £20,000 to implement from what I have been told. After 4-5 years the .co.uk could then resolve to an error page.

To say that 9.5m .co.uk owners should be put out because of 300,000 .org.uk owners and maybe 20,000 .me.uk owners want to upgrade doesn't make sense. Notice when I said that to Nominet they say they can't do that because .org.uk owners may want to upgrade (no longer running alongside).

Most .org.uk owners who use the extension for what it was designed for (RSPCA, Childline etc) don't use the .co.uk anyway even though they have them. they won't want to upgrade in most cases because they lose the feel of the .org.uk non profit making look. .org.uk would still be the second .uk extension, no relative change.

That puts this issue to bed forever, nobody at Nominet found any arguments when I spoke to them about it. The reason Nominet won't do that is they won't make money from it.

 

[Aegean]

ok

 

[anthony]

I guess that your comment that "if you can't beat them, you may as well join them" led me to a possibly incorrect assumption.

'them' meaning Nominet!

We need to focus on the areas we agree on (their proposal is wrong, .uk is wrong)...

Says who? The reasoning behind their proposal may be wrong, but I'm not sure we all agree that .uk is wrong, and that's because you're all too eager to portray any future registrants who are not currently the registrants of the .co.uk version as automatically squatters, which they probably wont be!

 

[websaway]

Currently trying to work on alternative solutions on .uk and how the uk namespace will look afterwards.

Does anybody please have any views, advantages and disadvantages to the following;

"the .uk ownership is paired to the .co.uk ownership for all time, for the exact same domain name."

Rgds
stephen

If there was a full take up of 9 million names and they still charged £20 per annum per name it would create a £180,000,000 per annum windfall for Nominet. So that may well be at the back of their proposals but £180,000,000 cost to domain holders who invested in a great place to be.

 

[Stephen]

If there was a full take up of 9 million names and they still charged £20 per annum per name it would create a £180,000,000 per annum windfall for Nominet. So that may well be at the back of their proposals but £180,000,000 cost to domain holders who invested in a great place to be.

Owners of the .co.uk would not have to take up the .uk they could still use .co.uk and choose to use it any time in the future when it suited, the point is their would be no dual ownership of the same .co.uk and .uk.

If you sold a .co.uk you sold the rights to .uk also.

Also the cost of the £20 assumes the security features would be compulsory and include all the elements Nominet have suggested, this to me is another seperate area to resolve.

 

[Stephen]

Don't launch mass registration in the second level. It was sensible for it to have been protected from mass registration for all this time because it allows further third level extensions to be created if required. In 2004 me.uk was one of those. and people use it. We don't and cannot ever know what we might need to create at the third level in the future. Protecting it is sensible.

Brazil, a country with a population of ~200 million people, and one of the large emerging economies protects its second level. A list of all their third level extensions (use Google Translate to translate Portuguese to English) can be found at: http://registro.br/dominio/dpn.html.

If we need further business orientated extensions under .uk then consider them in the third level. An obvious one is .com.uk which is reserved and could be offered. I wouldn't expect this to usurp .co.uk and it wouldn't block out the possibility of future third level extensions. If I had to choose between opening .uk or .com.uk to increase the availability of domain names to be used for business I'd pick the latter without hesitation for the reasons already explained.

Thanks.

If this was done the way you suggest, I would also table .net.uk a much underused tld be changed to a general useage for bloggers, emails, apps etc.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Does anybody please have any views, advantages and disadvantages to the following;

"the .uk ownership is paired to the .co.uk ownership for all time, for the exact same domain name."

I suspect that there are several reasons why Nominet has put forward this proposal and that none of them have anything to do with making more dosh for Nominet or its employees.

I'd guess that one reason is pressure from the forces of Law'n'Order/Govt to create a secure name space. Unfortunately none of them seem to understand that the proposed 'security' measures are just a smokescreen that the average phisher will get past whilst the average punter is lulled into a false sense of security that .uk is secure.

Another reason is a determination on the part of some to stamp out the secondary market that developed due to the stupidly low price of domain names coupled with an almost total lack of verification of registrant data. Allowing all current registrants of co.uk names to automatically get the .uk just perpetuates what many see as a problem.