.UK Announced

[websaway]

Markus is a member of the forum. is pro .uk along with plenty of others who watch this debate go around and around in circles from the sideline.

Have you read Edwin's post above yours ?

It's you who drives the debate around in circles because you cannot put forward credible justification to support your objectives.

 

[Sound]

So anyone who has opposing views to you insist credible.

and an apology would have been nice.....

 

[websaway]

So anyone who has opposing views to you insist credible.

and an apology would have been nice.....

I don't think you really do read the posts, including your own.

 

[Stephen]

NO - 1 and 2 letter .uk

Yes, but his stance is unsurprising given that I believe most of the 1-letter and 2-letter domains he bought (aside from ny.co.uk) were the .me.uk which cost him probably 1%-2% of what the .co.uk equivalents would have cost.....Everyone has biases - that's human nature - but some are just more obvious about it than others!

Although the .uk proposal form section J asks for feedback about 1 and 2 letter being available,
I'm sure it states somewhere offical that Nominet do not intend to release 1 and 2 letter .uk domains
even with section I sub-level domain restrictions on selling them on.

 

[Sound]

Yes, but his stance is unsurprising given that I believe most of the 1-letter and 2-letter domains he bought (aside from ny.co.uk) were the .me.uk which cost him probably 1%-2% of what the .co.uk equivalents would have cost.

So it obviously furthers his agenda to suggest that Nominet's stance of providing equal treatment to .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk owners is the right approach, even though that's patently nonsense in "fairness" terms.

Everyone has biases - that's human nature - but some are just more obvious about it than others!

I agree with you that his stance may have a bias but then many on this forum also have reason to be biased do they not.

What about the quote that says his "customers (all are positive) and genuine British businesses".

I have not seen any quotes from business people who are anti .uk and don't have a domain portfolio.

Are you as Nigel is warning people who are still purchasing domains from portfolio owners like yourself that they will need to also buy the .uk when it is launched?

And why not over the xmas period point your portfolio at your website to warn people of the consultation period.

 

[Stephen]

So anyone who has opposing views to you insist credible.
and an apology would have been nice.....

It does seem Nominet and others accept that if you support .uk it simply requires a YES statement, whereas anybody againist any aspect has to support their view with reasoned aurguments or facts which is what happens on this thread "most" of the time.

I have repeated, I can agree with lots of the YES camp statements including Nominet on occasion e.g. YES to:

• Is .uk better than .co.uk?
• Would .uk make it easier for non UK visitors to websites?
• Do you want better internet security?

What is not supplied by Nominet or any YES for .uk person are quality responses that answer the many of flaws presented in the current proposal.

Although I did not make a post againist your post quoting the
Markus Jalmerot, I agree (especially at Christmas) an apology for mis-reading your quote as your own, should be made by anybody crticising it as your statement if it has offended you.

 

[websaway]

So anyone who has opposing views to you insist credible.

and an apology would have been nice.....

I see, your post was not your opinion but a quote.
I have to say it looks like it's you who's saying it after you have refered to his link.
But quite happy to say my misunderstanding.

 

[Nigel]

Yes, but his stance is unsurprising given that I believe most of the 1-letter and 2-letter domains he bought (aside from ny.co.uk) were the .me.uk which cost him probably 1%-2% of what the .co.uk equivalents would have cost.

Good spot Edwin

 

[GreyWing]

Nominet will probably only recognize 'EU trademarks actively used'. While a handful or a few 100's domain names might be grabbed by trademark holders, most will be awarded to the current domain owners (IF they bothered to created a website..).

We already know that not to be true... That one thing that looks like a tiny difference could be the difference between hundreds of thousands of pounds for a business. It's wrong on two levels, trademarks from certain countries all over the world are allowed and MUST be included, Nominet have already admitted that. Secondly there is no mention of what constitutes prior use, so bothered to create a website is showing more misunderstanding.

 

[websaway]

It does seem Nominet and others accept that if you support .uk it simply requires a YES statement, whereas anybody againist any aspect has to support their view with reasoned aurguments or facts which is what happens on this thread "most" of the time.

I have repeated, I can agree with lots of the YES camp statements including Nominet on occasion e.g. YES to:

• Is .uk better than .co.uk?
• Would .uk make it easier for non UK visitors to websites?
• Do you want better internet security?

What is not supplied by Nominet or any YES for .uk person are quality responses that answer the many of flaws presented in the current proposal.

Although I did not make a post againist your post quoting the
Markus Jalmerot, I agree (especially at Christmas) an apology for mis-reading your quote as your own, should be made by anybody crticising it as your statement if it has offended you.

It was the same when they wanted the uk to join the euro currency.

Question: Wouldn't you love to have no exchange problems when you go abroad.

Answer: Yes of course I would in itself but joining the Euro would have deeper implications.

 

[Sound]

Good spot Edwin

Nigel this is still someone who runs a successful business and spent £X,XXX pounds on a two letter domain at the Nominet auction.

Who has been to the consultation meetings in London listened to the whole debate and then decided he is pro .uk

 

[markb]

One of the main reasons why i'm against the direct.uk proposal, is because I am a business owner and website developer, I own several fully developed websites, and have recently spent £50k+ on a few premium .co.uk generic domain names which I have plans to develop, some of which are currently in development stages, some have already gone live, and some are in a queue to be developed.

When I bought these domains I did'nt buy the corresponding .org.uk or .me.uk or other uk domains, I didnt think there was any need too, the .co.uk IS the domain to buy for businesses and has always been promoted as this. The .org.uk is for organisations/charities and the .me.uk for personal websites.

I now feel a bit cheated, as I dont have trademarks for these names, and as mentioned I dont own all the other tlds for these domains. This means I may lose the corresponding .uk domains to trademark holders and other .tld owners if I dont bid the most in auctions. What makes is worse, is that as mentioned some of the sites havent yet gone live, so under the current proposals I may not even get the chance to bid in auctions for these .uk domains.

Theres going to be hundreds of thousands of businesses in the same situation as myself I'm sure.

 

[Nigel]

Nigel this is still someone who runs a successful business and spent £X,XXX pounds on a two letter domain at the Nominet auction.

Who has been to the consultation meetings in London listened to the whole debate and then decided he is pro .uk

I assume that is because he has looked at what he can gain from this, and what he can lose, and he thinks he can win from the process. So he is willing to take a chance on his ny.co.uk domain. There are plenty of others who know they're going to lose from this unfair process and have spent tens of thousands on a premium descriptive domain, or they have built up a business over years on a descriptive term that they cannot trademark, and they're going to lose a large part of that investment. Then there are others who don't even know the consultation is happening but they'll receive the shock of their lives if they find out it's all been agreed and someone else is going to get the .uk possibly ruining their business and their livelihood. If you think this is fair then I hope you don't get treated like that in business. If a financial services company mis-sells they have to pay compensation but if its a monopoly like nominet thats seems to be OK.

 

[GreyWing]

Nigel this is still someone who runs a successful business and spent £X,XXX pounds on a two letter domain at the Nominet auction.

Who has been to the consultation meetings in London listened to the whole debate and then decided he is pro .uk

Sound that is exactly what people are telling you, this guy got two fundamental facts about the proposal wrong.

Now assuming he is not misleading us (which I don't think he is), if someone who has been to the meetings and capable of running a successful business can still fail to understand it.... what chance has the average business owner got of understanding what is about to hit them?

 

[Nigel]

One of the main reasons why i'm against the direct.uk proposal, is because I am a business owner and website developer, I own several fully developed websites, and have recently spent £50k+ on a few premium .co.uk generic domain names which I have plans to develop, some of which are currently in development stages, some have already gone live, and some are in a queue to be developed.

When I bought these domains I did'nt buy the corresponding .org.uk or .me.uk or other uk domains, I didnt think there was any need too, the .co.uk IS the domain to buy for businesses and has always been promoted as this. The .org.uk is for organisations/charities and the .me.uk for personal websites.

I now feel a bit cheated, as I dont have trademarks for these names, and as mentioned I dont own all the other tlds for these domains. This means I may lose the corresponding .uk domains to trademark holders and other .tld owners if I dont bid the most in auctions. What makes is worse, is that as mentioned some of the sites havent yet gone live, so under the current proposals I may not even get the chance to bid in auctions for these .uk domains.

Theres going to be hundreds of thousands of businesses in the same situation as myself I'm sure.

Don't blame you for feeling cheated - Don't suppose any of these nominet executives even own a .co.uk descriptive domain.

 

[websaway]

One of the main reasons why i'm against the direct.uk proposal, is because I am a business owner and website developer, I own several fully developed websites, and have recently spent £50k+ on a few premium .co.uk generic domain names which I have plans to develop, some of which are currently in development stages, some have already gone live, and some are in a queue to be developed.

When I bought these domains I did'nt buy the corresponding .org.uk or .me.uk or other uk domains, I didnt think there was any need too, the .co.uk IS the domain to buy for businesses and has always been promoted as this. The .org.uk is for organisations/charities and the .me.uk for personal websites.

I now feel a bit cheated, as I dont have trademarks for these names, and as mentioned I dont own all the other tlds for these domains. This means I may lose the corresponding .uk domains to trademark holders and other .tld owners if I dont bid the most in auctions. What makes is worse, is that as mentioned some of the sites havent yet gone live, so under the current proposals I may not even get the chance to bid in auctions for these .uk domains.

Theres going to be hundreds of thousands of businesses in the same situation as myself I'm sure.

This is a good example of why this can't be a democratic process, it will be decided on legalities and fear of legal repercussions. If it was a democratic thing lot's of people would rejoice at your misfortune.

 

[markb]

Don't blame you for feeling cheated - Don't suppose any of these nominet executives even own a .co.uk descriptive domain.

Yes your probably right. I would have have thought as the .uk proposed domains are supposedly for businesses they should be offered to .co.uk owners first. If the domains where brought out for organisations then they should be offered to .org.uk owners.

Its annoying for the thousands of businesses who have bought the .co.uk domain for their business, only for nominet to bring out a new business domain which obviously aims to replace the existing .co.uk business domain, but in hundreds of thousands of cases, the existing .co.uk owner wont get the new domain which will end up in the hands of a competing business to cause confusion.

 

[Stephen]

Nigel this is still someone who runs a successful business and spent £X,XXX pounds on a two letter domain at the Nominet auction.

Who has been to the consultation meetings in London listened to the whole debate and then decided he is pro .uk

ny.co.uk cost £4,500 at the Nominet domain auction
The website looks decent and he hope he does well with it.
It may that he believes as do his clients that they got a bargain with ny.co.uk and lots more opportunities will be created with .uk.


I did not see him at all the London Nominet consultation meetings I went to, I think he may have attended the "open house" Nominet meeting on Thursday 8 November, which is the only one were 25-30 people attended, about 10 Nominet staff and the rest domainers, when there was an opportunity to express an opinion and get a limited amount of responses from Nominet.

 

[Nigel]

I've just asked Markus on the guardian Phil Kingsland thread whether all the 20 or so domains he won in the 1 and 2 letter auction were .co.uk or whether he also won some .org.uk and .me.uk. If has purchased the vastly inferior and non business domain .me.uk then I can understand why he likes the proposals as they stand. I need to know for sure before I can respond to him properly in that thread.

MarkB - its a disgrace that nominet should suggest .org.uk and .me.uk be given an equal footing (or an advantage if they have used their domain and you haven't) with a .co.uk domain. With one hand they set out suggested uses for .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk - and then they say that all of them have equal right to a domain for businesses. Crazy.

 

[GreyWing]

I see Andrew Bennett is reporting that the chair of the Nominet's .uk Policy Stakeholder Committee James Panton has resigned ? Along with his deputy Mike Galvin?

Not communicated to members, the reasons are not known. Nor was Dave Thomas's appointment to the committee. Dave wrote in the guardian this week about it.... we didn't know he did so in the capacity of his new post.