.UK Announced

[Bailey]

Just in recent years many countries have opened up second level registrations. Not all third level domain holders take advantage of their preemptive rights to register their names at the second level (rights which they have most of the time). So when they don't, it opens opportunities for others

Well we have already discussed China and Japan. (or at least I have)

So can you list the Many others - for this readers benefit. It is also relevant just how far the Internet economy of those countries had grown prior to opening-up the second level

 

[sdsinc]

It is also relevant just how far the Internet economy of those countries had grown prior to opening-up the second level

Absolutely right. I was thinking TLDs like .pe .cr but there are others.
There was .in in 2005 I believe (not sure).
.ae
Later on .im
.co of course.
.pa in progress.
I have lost track of how many -there are more but for sure they cannot be compared to .co.uk.

Personally I think third level domains are remnants of the past. Because I don't like the idea of being cornered into a category, whether COmmercial or ORGanization (non profit) or whatever, what if I just want to say British. The second level is all that you need, like in other countries (not all of them though, the UK is not an exception or oddity).
So I think it should have been done much earlier. Now, I don't know if that makes sense.

As you suggest, .co.uk is so established and pervasive that we are not talking about a mere change of habits here, it's a revolution.
I'm not sure there is any public demand backing this move. That's what matters right ?
To me it sounds like we have a registry that wants to be portrayed in the public light for being innovative and looking forward to the future, I mean they have to come up with ideas to justify their existence and salaries :lol:
In a way it could be argued this is another case of fixing what ain't broken.
But what do I know, I'm not British, just a modest stakeholder in the namespace

 

[Marcoose]

The more I think about it, the more of a scam/money making rip off it sounds.

What's the main benefit here? More choice? I don't believe that security BS, just make the needed changes to .co.uk. THEY decided to run with .co.uk and push it as the premier choice for UK domains - THEY can't go and change it now that so many businesses are based upon it and have made in many cases, huge investment decisions on that basis.

This is going to be such a massive headache for the industry as a whole, on so many different levels. The bad outweighs the good and it is so clear that it's the wrong thing to do. If there needs to be more choice, release another second tier extension. This is too big a decision for Nominet to make with the impact it is going to have on the millions of of businesses online. It should be decided on a government level after an in depth investigation into the effect it is going to have on the economy.

... these are my 7am, sleep deprived thoughts anyway.

 

[the_poet]

My opinion is that Nominet is leveraging all this new gTLD hype started by Icann to steal some money. If you think about it, even pricing will be in line with that of domains in the new gTLDs.

 

[Jump]

There is nothing wrong with going to the second level, if third level holders get first rights on the second level names, eg 14 days to buy the new name.

But going with what they have proposed as to Sunrise, the thing I find particularly onerous is that the proposal gives priority to trademark holders (fine), but it does not give priority to those trademark owners who own the corresponding second level .co.uk extension.

The net effect is that these people will have to fight it out with other mark holders, at auction. That is just not reasonable.

If Nominet genuinely wanted to create a safe name space, why dont they launch the “safe.uk” ccTLD?

 

[the_poet]

The right way of assigning a .uk would be to give priority to the owner of the .co.uk only if that domain was registered before a certain date. This solution would be perfect if it weren't for the corresponding .org.uk and .me.uk owners.

 

[foz]

Consultation submissions at Nominet should be published on their website as they come in. Being left in the dark for several months as to the overall consensus is nerve racking (if at all published?). It will keep Nominet (the board) honest and transparent as to their actions based on that consensus.

 

[foz]

If Nominet genuinely wanted to create a safe name space, why dont they launch the “safe.uk” ccTLD?

No money in it?

The safety measures are a ruse. A marketing package to command £20 per year.

 

[Bailey]

No money in it?

The safety measures are a ruse. A marketing package to command £20 per year.

Yes and as a "dare I say desperate and cowardly" measure to placate all those complainants who really should have a better grasp on their business in a modern world.

Unfortunatently in this instance the cure may well kill the patient

 

[Bailey]

Perhaps Nominet should consider opening-up the UK as a real premium, not as a junket money making after thought at £20

£20,000 pa - would differentiate those that mean to use a gilt-edged UK association to its best.

Don't you also wonder if this so-called secure namespace that (new internet ;-) .uk) is supposedly going to run on is already a done deal with the providers.

Personal Investment wise I really don't give a damn - I'm just annoyed that the UK namespace can be so easily toyed around with

 

[Jump]

No money in it?

The safety measures are a ruse. A marketing package to command £20 per year.

I agree. You know the great irony here, boys and girls?

Nominet are exposing rights holders who own their .co.uk name, to great exposure and risk. Security of my brands are at stake.

What if my pockets are not deep enough to compete with other mark holders with all my brands? (Rhetorical question.)

 

[arkvard]

As Nominet have stated the .uk is going to be a much more secure domain and you have to have a UK presence to be able to apply for one.

Is it possible then that they will not even offer the new .uk to the existing holders as they can see the contact details are not from this country?

 

[foz]

Perhaps Nominet should consider opening-up the UK as a real premium, not as a junket money making after thought at £20

£20,000 pa - would differentiate those that mean to use a gilt-edged UK association to its best.[/B]

Like .tv. Registry hikes (price increase reviews) turned users away didn't it? or cooled enthusiasm.

 

[foz]

Is it possible then that they will not even offer the new .uk to the existing holders as they can see the contact details are not from this country?

UK presence - Shadow Companies, Trusts with help from legal will get round this little hurdle.

 

[Bailey]

Like .tv. Registry hikes (price increase reviews) turned users away didn't it? or cooled enthusiasm.

dot.TV (as it was known) is not a comparison to the UK standing and Brand.

I'm pleased the small Island of Tuvalu got a good payday for the .tv Extension Be a real shame to see the uk namespace become a similar sales platform.

But thats better than this late-in-the-day confusion thats proposed. And as you seem to be suggesting foz be interesting to see how many really want to put their money where their mouths are

 

[websaway]

A construction company developed a business model some years ago whereby they created a land bank. The company buy available land in bad times and build on and sell the houses or sometimes sell the land in good times,maybe even selling the land with a contract to build, whichever is commercially most viable. It's land bank was the subject of much concern when britain was a socialist thinking country. However, since the uk embraced the capitalist market driven system in the 1980's it became not only acceptable but commendable.
Is it imaginable that in modern day Britain the government would tell the building company that unless it had built on the land by a certain date then it will confiscate the land and sell it to someone else to allow them to build on it.

Many online developers have a similar business model with a bank of co.uk domain names (commercial name space ). They can take and build on them when the time is right, buy more in the bad times and hold them until it's commercially viable to develop them, sell them if it's commercially viable to do so and even sell and contract to build the web presence on them. This is a good business model which makes good business sense.
Is it imaginable that a governing body in modern times in Britain could come along and say because you have not developed the names at a given date we are going to confiscate your commercial domain space and sell it to someone else.

 

[foz]

Good analogy. I would compare it to an earthquake on land, an earthquake so strong no one ever wants to build on it again.

 

[websaway]

Dear Nominet


I am the contractual owner of the business domain name xxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk
I registered this name in good faith in the co.uk extension because I understood from you that it was the ultimate commercial/business webspace of the united kingdom.
I now understand a new commercial/business extension may be launched which will directly compete with my business.
I find the suggestion of a new extension unnessesary for my business, but in any case, should the new commercial/business extension of .uk be launched I would not be prepared to absorb the expense of registering or using the extension and I would expect that you would, because of contractual obligations, not offer the name xxxxxxxxxxxx.uk to any other entity.

 

[splashweb]

Published an article which I'm aiming at SME's and other less aware domain owners:

http://www.splashweb.co.uk/directuk

The more of these stakeholders that comment to Nominet the better IMO.

 

[foz]

Published an article which I'm aiming at SME's and other less aware domain owners:

http://www.splashweb.co.uk/directuk

The more of these stakeholders that comment to Nominet the better IMO.

Well written.