.UK Announced

[Edwin]

If I understand you correctly then no - its a different domain, and thats how he would see it. The public are also used to hearing the .co.uk extension. If he wants bikes.uk he'd have to buy it, even if he already owned bikes.co.uk. He also wouldn't be bothered if completely different people owned bikes.org.uk and bikes.me.uk and bikes.com, which they do, as these are different domain names.

Then, bluntly, your client has no real understanding of how online business works.

There is already KNOWN confusion between .co.uk and .com.

The potential for confusion between .co.uk and .uk is orders of magnitude higher as they are far more similar.

That means that every single time your client advertises bikes.uk, they will also be sending some potential customers to the owner of bikes.co.uk (and likewise the owner of bikes.co.uk will be sending customers to bikes.uk). This is INEVITABLE. It's not "an opinion because I said so", it's a fact. The issue of confusion is known and understood.

The same ugly problem rears its way at the level of email addresses. Somebody is working on a deal to buy 5,000 bikes from your client at the wholesale level, then keys in [email protected] (easy to do it's the most familiar web address, after all) and sends the final proposal with costs, stats and projections straight to the sales team of your largest competitor.

Now imagine the same thing happening (across other domains) to sensitive information of any kind (hospital records, crime reports, financial details, legal advice, witness protection records etc.) and you will hopefully see the potential for a vast increase in the number of privacy breaches and loss of trade secrets.

Of course your client doesn't care about bikes.org.uk or bikes.me.uk - those extensions mean very little to most consumers. But everyone's familiar with .co.uk, as Nominet's "Domain Business Reports" have clearly demonstrated http://db.nominet.org.uk/ - and for the first time ever there's a direct UK-specific, business-targeted competitor to that extension.

 

[websaway]

I agree too Julian.

OK I'm not an experienced domainer, I'm a developer / online project manager. However I don't understand the logic behind this argument against the .uk introduction.

Just because you own a domain with one extension, it surely doesn't entitle you to another. I recently read (from a link on here) that Barclays own bank.co.uk and due to this introduction they will "lose" bank.uk. They wont lose it because they don't own it, they'll have to buy it, so thats a false scenario. They don't own bank.com either, or bank.org.uk. Company names are protected already.

For example, I had a business customer of mine with 10 bike shops interested in bikes.co.uk for his business. However bikes.co.uk is controlled by a domain leasing company and unless you are willing to lease the name you won't get it. Bikes.org.uk is owned by someone else, as are bikes.me.uk and bikes.com. So whats the problem if he buys bikes.uk?

Generally I buy domains on here for business clients of mine that are actually going to use them, or for myself to develop personally, but the truth is that I have had many conversations with frustrated "real" businesses who have been held to ransom by people who own domains they want. So it is increasingly difficult to obtain the name they want for their business website.

Talking to a few of them recently and telling them about the possible .uk introduction, almost all of them were pleased, thinking they might now actually be able to get a name that would benefit their business.

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.

Your points of course, like all of us do, are constructed in a way so as to substantiate your views and feelings on the matter.

Barclays naturally won't lose the.uk but it will dilute that which they have already bought and built upon in the belief that the co.uk was the uk domain business space.

bikes.co.uk is a generic domain bought under commercial circumstances and owned by someone who has a right to it, it should not enter into the .uk argument.

your argument about "real" businesses who want a domain is nothing new but as with all property, whether intellectual or not, if it already has an owner then it has to be leased or purchased, if we could all have what we wanted through methods other than hard work or purchasing power we would not live in a capitalist system where ownership and the laws protecting that ownership is what drives the system on. It's not any more increasingly difficult for your clients to acquire the name they want ( and that would have enormous value to their business ) than it is for a first time buyer to buy a mayfair flat. There are of course real families up and down the country who want to live in all the owned properties in the uk, shall we allow the homeless to build in peoples back gardens.

Your clients will not be able to get the prime internet real estate you allude to on the cheap even if .UK goes ahead, and you should make that abundantly clear to them.

If these proposals were in the least bit practicable the people who have driven the UK domain name space and develeloped prime portfolios would not need nor want to protect their own interests above what is normal in business. If someone wanted to build in your back garden would you feel good when you objected if others said you are simply looking after your own interests and that was your only concern.

I don't think this is about pecking order I think the .uk should not be introduced as a competitor to the co.uk namespace. A .uk extension released specifically for business use would in itself be ABUSIVE.

 

[Edwin]

With .uk possibly being introduced it will be prudent for most to secure this extension merely as a means to protect their goodwill in the market.

That is the advice being put forward by lawfirms to their clients. For example
www.pitmans.com/news/new-uk-domains-consider-your-strategy-now
http://www.ashfords.co.uk/news/_brands_bulletin_stop_the_press

 

[anthony]

EDWIN, you were arguing for 'grandfather' rights to start with, is this still your wish?

 

[Edwin]

EDWIN, you were arguing for 'grandfather' rights to start with, is this still your wish?

No, I was arguing that .uk should not go ahead. That remains my basic position, and indeed my view has been strengthened by everything I've heard during the face-to-face consultations with Nominet.

However, should it go ahead anyway, then as a second step I was arguing that grandfather rights should indeed apply. (Just like skydivers have a main parachute and a backup chute in case the first failed, I judged it was prudent to have a main position and a backup position on the matter should events overtake the main position)

 

[anthony]

No, I was arguing that .uk should not go ahead. That remains my basic position, and indeed my view has been strengthened by everything I've heard during the face-to-face consultations with Nominet.

However, should it go ahead anyway, then I was arguing that grandfather rights should indeed apply. (Just like skydivers have a main parachute and a backup chute in case the first failed, I judged it was prudent to have a main position and a backup position on the matter should events overtake the main position).

A kind of altruism, but with a self interest behind it on second base!

 

[websaway]

A kind of altruism, but with a self interest behind it on second base!

A lot of people help the homeless but draw the line at bringing them all in to live with them, is that selfish ?

 

[Aegean]

Then, bluntly, your client has no real understanding of how online business works.

Really?

 

[Brassneck]

I agree too Julian.

OK I'm not an experienced domainer, I'm a developer / online project manager. However I don't understand the logic behind this argument against the .uk introduction.

Just because you own a domain with one extension, it surely doesn't entitle you to another. I recently read (from a link on here) that Barclays own bank.co.uk and due to this introduction they will "lose" bank.uk. They wont lose it because they don't own it, they'll have to buy it, so thats a false scenario. They don't own bank.com either, or bank.org.uk. Company names are protected already.

For example, I had a business customer of mine with 10 bike shops interested in bikes.co.uk for his business. However bikes.co.uk is controlled by a domain leasing company and unless you are willing to lease the name you won't get it. Bikes.org.uk is owned by someone else, as are bikes.me.uk and bikes.com. So whats the problem if he buys bikes.uk?

Generally I buy domains on here for business clients of mine that are actually going to use them, or for myself to develop personally, but the truth is that I have had many conversations with frustrated "real" businesses who have been held to ransom by people who own domains they want. So it is increasingly difficult to obtain the name they want for their business website.

Talking to a few of them recently and telling them about the possible .uk introduction, almost all of them were pleased, thinking they might now actually be able to get a name that would benefit their business.

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.

Actually I pretty much agree. I suspect others on here do to.

Stephen

 

[Edwin]

Really?

Yes, so long as you insist their business will not be impacted by the launch of .uk if they can only secure one or other of .co.uk or .uk for their main business.

 

[Stephen]

Making the case to a valid point of view

Just because you own a domain with one extension, it surely doesn't entitle you to another. I recently read (from a link on here) that Barclays own bank.co.uk and due to this introduction they will "lose" bank.uk. They wont lose it because they don't own it, they'll have to buy it, so that’s a false scenario. They don't own bank.com either, or bank.org.uk. Company names are protected already. ……

I believe the majority of .co.uk owners understand and accept (some reluctantly )that anybody can register over 150 different tld’s including .com, .net. .co, .eu, .org.uk etc. and the many new ones coming .shop etc. and offer a competitive website to your own.

Each one of those tld’s says something unique about the website on the tld.
The difference in the uk namespace there is a primary extension .co.uk which has been evolving and invested in for over 15 years, so in effect they own the rights to the prime uk domain namespace, Nominet intend to take that position away from them.

You could say they could simply spend £20 and buy it, but once you scratch the service you realize it is not that simple.

……For example, I had a business customer of mine with 10 bike shops interested in bikes.co.uk for his business. However bikes.co.uk is controlled by a domain leasing company and unless you are willing to lease the name you won't get it. Bikes.org.uk is owned by someone else, as are bikes.me.uk and bikes.com. So whats the problem if he buys bikes.uk?......

As you know from your answer to the question “what would the client pay for bikes.uk?” – your client will never own it. Nominet would get the money, the consumer would face confusion and the owner of bikes.co.uk would face a large bill or unfair competition.

The market does allow your client to choose which shops they trade from in the physical world, the same applies in the virtual world your client can buy any domain as long as they can agree the right price with the current owner or register a domain with an extra word.

…….Generally I buy domains on here for business clients of mine that are actually going to use them, or for myself to develop personally, but the truth is that I have had many conversations with frustrated "real" businesses who have been held to ransom by people who own domains they want. So it is increasingly difficult to obtain the name they want for their business website……..

I too share that frustration and I’m experiencing it all the time. I believe the position would be 100 times worse if .uk went ahead in its current form as due to the lack of awareness by ordinary business this is happening and there understanding of this area.

That over 1,000,000 (my guess) current .co.uk will not get their .uk equivalent and will be held to ransom by some companies that will register 100,000’s of new domains in the blink of an eye and there will be 10,000’s of people how will register a few domains and not provide no contact information or a website, so you cannot get in touch with them to even buy it, how frustrating is that!

……..Talking to a few of them recently and telling them about the possible .uk introduction, almost all of them were pleased, thinking they might now actually be able to get a name that would benefit their business. …….

I hope I have answered some of that above.

But uk business are resourceful and come up with all sorts of names with using prefix, suffix, common starts like my or the, geographic area etc to their keyword or simply a new made up word or 4 letters there are lots of choices still left.

Also the client can buy some current domains for very reasonable prices.

I have also asked Nominet to review the expiry process, so people with a real need for a domain can register with Nominet rather than take pot luck catching it themselves.

…….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…….

I hope that I have shown to some degree, that this is not all about domainers self interest.

 

[websaway]

Actually I pretty much agree. I suspect others on here do to.

Stephen

Yes, it's winning me over

I'll have the bikes.uk for £20 I'm also going to register homeloans.uk for £20 and I have a list of a few thousand other names I've compiled all for £20 each.

OH hang on, is that self interest, aswell as just plain delusion.

The introduction of a .UK business domain name space would in itself be ABUSIVE.

 

[anthony]

...I'm happy to accept this but I'm not happy to see people at Nominet towers get rich while I take a hit which is why for me, this IS personal.

Totally agree. It's not the introduction that concerns me, but Nominets' motives behind it. Given that it is intoduced correctly, and for the right reasons, then fair enough (but with no grandfather rights).

I should add that the auction stages should be replaced by one-off sealed bids, it'll reduce the overall pot for the glory seekers over at Nom Towers who the members have thrown their powers away to over the years!

 

[Edwin]

I have put together an outline of the pros and cons of the CONCEPT of .uk (not Nominet's proposal - that's just one possible way to implement .uk, but the underlying idea of having a .uk)

http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/pros-and-cons.html

It might perhaps help in discussions with regular businesses.

 

[Stephen]

I have put together an outline of the pros and cons of the CONCEPT of .uk (not Nominet's proposal - that's just one possible way to implement .uk, but the underlying idea of having a .uk)

http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/pros-and-cons.html

It might perhaps help in discussions with regular businesses.

Thanks very much, I much needed article.

Will get back on some suggestions on the list, as soon as I have finished my chores.

 

[Brassneck]

I hope that I have shown to some degree, that this is not all about domainers self interest.

Stephen

20 plus years in the Civil Service and I have been involved in a lot of consultations. Reality is that when you receive submissions from stakeholders you are bound to read them with reference to what their potential vested interests are. If it is 3rd runway at Heathrow, then of course British Airways, BAA etc are going to argue from one point of view. Therefore, any submission from a know domain investor like Edwin or yourself is going to be read knowing that you do have possible vested interests in the way this pans out. This will happen no matter how balanced/fair your arguments are (or you think they are).

When they analyse the responses they will most likely categorise responders into groups - e.g. 'real' businesses, domainers, Joe Public, etc and will try to see what themes occur within the groups and across the groups. If there is broad agreement then probably easy for them to decide what to do - if not, then they will start to weight strength of responses by perceived importance of each group. A priority for Govt at the moment is to kick start the economy so the views of businesses and opportunities to make real contributions to economic growth might be seen as an important weighting factor. Of course, Nominet isn't a Govt Department, but I would be surprised if BIS haven't discussed with them ways in which Nominet could contribute to economic growth.

Stephen.

 

[simondooner]

Too confusingly similar

Last week I wrote to several SME business networks I’m involved with to advise members of the .uk proposal. I provided links to Nominet and to some of the good work done by members here.

The response was mixed from outrage to… “so what”.

However, I thought I’d share one response from a real UK business…

One MD of a mid-sized SME I know well asked his web designer if it would impact his business. The designer told him it probably wouldn’t have any impact, and if .uk was implemented he could simply buy the matching .uk domain name as “who else would want it any way”. So no problem there.

Because I respect this MD I checked and found it wasn’t that straight forward.

His company name is in the form "Apples & Pears Fabrications" (not the real name) and they have used the matching domain format “apfabrications.co.uk” for over 12 years. Their domain is well recognised and vital to their business, the email addresses they use I suspect are even more critical.

I asked him if loosing the domain “apfabrications.uk” to a competitor would cause a problem. I also asked if having a competitor use the email address [email protected] would cause issues… Almost certainly… [email protected] is so confusingly similar to [email protected] that it could, in the wrong hands cause serious commercial damage. Think of the confusion it could cause with customers, suppliers, partners; the lost sales, wayward emails, the potential damage to their reputation, the opportunities for fraud… and more.

You might ask who would want the domain name “apfabrications.uk”? There are no trade mark owners to battle, however there are several businesses registered at Companies House using the name format "A P Fabrications", all potentially with a good shout for unregistered rights and who may want the name.

Their domain is fairly unremarkable to most and on the face of it you may ask who else would want it? However, it is vital to their credibility, to their future success. Their domain and email addresses have worked well for them for over 12 years, they’ve invested heavily and built a strong reputation. Is it reasonable that they may now have to battle to retain something that is so confusingly similar to what they already have… simply to protect their business… to stand still.

If .uk proceeds scenarios like this will be repeated all over the UK. Those businesses that are informed and understand the implications of this flawed proposal have at least a chance to protect their future… if at significant cost, for those that are in the dark if could be disastrous.

 

[Edwin]

Or if it's just about security and not money, choose an applicant randomly, that'd be by far the fairest way as it wouldn't discriminate financially.

Or give it to the oldest registrant (there's precedent in 12 other countries) which would negate all auctions.

And if they were genuinely worried about security (in other words, if the security risks were so massive that the risks they represented validated the need for an expensive and complex exercise of trust/verification) then Nominet would have to roll it out to all domains, period.

By picking and choosing, they're saying "Hey, there's this massive security problem we've identified, so we'll solve it by starting from scratch and the millions of existing websites can just soldier on insecurely - tough luck!"

 

[Stephen]

Stephen

Stephen

20 plus years in the Civil Service and I have been involved in a lot of consultations. Reality is that when you receive submissions from stakeholders you are bound to read them with reference to what their potential vested interests are. If it is 3rd runway at Heathrow, then of course British Airways, BAA etc are going to argue from one point of view. Therefore, any submission from a know domain investor like Edwin or yourself is going to be read knowing that you do have possible vested interests in the way this pans out. This will happen no matter how balanced/fair your arguments are (or you think they are).

When they analyse the responses they will most likely categorise responders into groups - e.g. 'real' businesses, domainers, Joe Public, etc and will try to see what themes occur within the groups and across the groups. If there is broad agreement then probably easy for them to decide what to do - if not, then they will start to weight strength of responses by perceived importance of each group. A priority for Govt at the moment is to kick start the economy so the views of businesses and opportunities to make real contributions to economic growth might be seen as an important weighting factor. Of course, Nominet isn't a Govt Department, but I would be surprised if BIS haven't discussed with them ways in which Nominet could contribute to economic growth.

Stephen.

Thanks for the insight and I agree my views will be seen by Nominet as a vested interest as a portfolio owner and as registrant with trading websites that employ 100 people. I did raise this with Nominet at the round table, that will they also ensure that people with no domain names now, who see this as a quick way to get rich will also be categorized.

I simply want to share my views to a wider audience as I believe Nominet have done a bad job on how they have framed the proposal, who they are seeking responses from, their basic research and I see the likelyhood of a very big backwards step for the uk namespace if this goes ahead.

I have provided several different ideas on how Nominet can really assist to move the uk internet along, all of which was well received.

Rgds
Stephen

 

[websaway]

Stephen

20 plus years in the Civil Service and I have been involved in a lot of consultations. Reality is that when you receive submissions from stakeholders you are bound to read them with reference to what their potential vested interests are. If it is 3rd runway at Heathrow, then of course British Airways, BAA etc are going to argue from one point of view. Therefore, any submission from a know domain investor like Edwin or yourself is going to be read knowing that you do have possible vested interests in the way this pans out. This will happen no matter how balanced/fair your arguments are (or you think they are).

When they analyse the responses they will most likely categorise responders into groups - e.g. 'real' businesses, domainers, Joe Public, etc and will try to see what themes occur within the groups and across the groups. If there is broad agreement then probably easy for them to decide what to do - if not, then they will start to weight strength of responses by perceived importance of each group. A priority for Govt at the moment is to kick start the economy so the views of businesses and opportunities to make real contributions to economic growth might be seen as an important weighting factor. Of course, Nominet isn't a Govt Department, but I would be surprised if BIS haven't discussed with them ways in which Nominet could contribute to economic growth.

Stephen.

You go through all that and then state the obvious that they are not a government department so all you say is nothing to do with insight from a civil servant. And when it comes to vested interests none have more than nominet themselves and some board members, so I'm afraid you liking this to a government introduced enquiry or consultation has little credibility.