.UK Announced

[Nigel]

Thanks for that Stephen. There is a lot to read and on a brief scan it seems to indicate to me that they can email individuals about similar products when a sale has already been made. We could do with a legal expert looking at this. In any event I'm sure they have an obligation to write to you if they propose introducing a 'new service' that will adversely affect the service you currently receive. I'm taking a look at Nominet's previous correspondence with our company and me individually. They didn't mind asking for feedback in this email they sent me:


Dear Customer

We recently emailed you to invite you to take part in a survey about your experience of Nominet's customer service. We value your opinion and your feedback will help us to improve our service to you in the future, so please take a couple of minutes now to complete the survey.

Have your say for a chance to win an iPod Touch
To say thank you for taking part in the survey we have 3 Apple iPod Touches to give away! For your chance to win an iPod Touch, please enter your email address at the end of the survey (terms and conditions apply).

If you have any questions about this research, please contact us at [email protected] or by telephoning 01865 332244.

I would like to thank you very much in advance for your time.

Kind Regards,

Jonathan Watkins
Customer Services Manager
Nominet UK
T +44 (0) 1865 332244
F +44 (0) 1865 332288
E [email protected]
http://www.nominet.org.uk


Further information

An independent research company called The Leadership Factor is conducting the survey on our behalf. Find out more about The Leadership Factor on their web site.

A summary and analysis of the survey results will be published on our web site.

If you would like to be notified when the results from this survey are published, please reply to this email with the subject line Survey results.

Your participation in this survey and the answers supplied are completely anonymous unless you choose to give your email address at the end of the survey. The results and statistics from this survey will be made public. We will never share your email address with anybody else. If you would like to opt out of all future customer satisfaction surveys that we carry out, please reply to this email with the subject line unsubscribe-from-surveys.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Nominet UK is a company limited by guarantee and registered in England under No. 3203859. Our registered office is Minerva House, Edmund Halley Road, Oxford Science Park, Oxford, OX4 4DQ, England.

 

[Brassneck]

Thanks for that Stephen. There is a lot to read and on a brief scan it seems to indicate to me that they can email individuals about similar products when a sale has already been made.

Yes I saw that .......

 

[GreyWing]

Great post from Alex Bligh, Alex was right there at the beginning of Nominet and few know more about the place in my opinion.

http://blog.alex.org.uk/2013/01/04/nominet-direct-uk-consultation/

 

[websaway]

Great post from Alex Bligh, Alex was right there at the beginning of Nominet and few know more about the place in my opinion.

http://blog.alex.org.uk/2013/01/04/nominet-direct-uk-consultation/

Thank's for posting. A good read.

 

[Stephen]

3 days to go!

Make a difference.

To make sure it is a good 2013 please make sure you have posted your comments to Nominet on .uk proposal
http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/policy-development/current-policy-discussions-and-consultations/consultation-new-uk

Or if you want to add additional comments please email them to [email protected]

Act now time is quickly running out!

Only 3 more days and on last day the 7th January it may be usual closing hour as cut off?

 

[Stephen]

How many?

Hi Everyone,

I received a reply about a week ago from Eleanor Bradley COO at Nominet to my email (which I posted earlier in this thread). I sent a further email to nominet last week (and chased them for a reply today) and I'll post my email here in a minute.

......Regarding the roundtables these events had a good level of attendance from a broad range of stakeholders, to the extent that we scheduled an additional business and industry session. We will be providing the details of those who registered as part of the summary that will be published after the close of the consultation.

Kind regards
Eleanor
Eleanor Bradley
COO Nominet UK

There will be a difference between those that attended and the larger number Nominet intend to use the number registered.

I know Edwin and myself were refused entry into an afternoon session as we were told it was full only to find later that not all turned up and spaces were available.

They should publish list in 2 parts attened and those registered who did not turn up?

 

[Stephen]

Alex Bligh

Great post from Alex Bligh, Alex was right there at the beginning of Nominet and few know more about the place in my opinion.

http://blog.alex.org.uk/2013/01/04/nominet-direct-uk-consultation/

Great article, it would be very positive if he could join the discussion at Acorn to add more valid points made.

Lets hope it makes a few more people, make there comments to Nominet before the deadline.

If Nominet take a step back as many have suggested and open it into a real debate on .uk and the UK namespace and what Nominet could do to improve internet business and security, he would be a great addition to the debate.

 

[Edwin]

I know Edwin and myself were refused entry into an afternoon session as we were told it was full only to find later that not all turned up and spaces were available.

Which apparently could easily have been predicted in advance, as they ALWAYS have no-shows. But frankly they'd grown tired of hearing from me!

 

[Simon]

Thanks for the link to Alex Blighs blog post. It provided yet another clear and consise opinion why this consultation is flawed.

I may be the only person here to have not filled in the consulation response but if I'm not and you are reading this, I urge you to fill it in now. It will be an hour or so well spent.

I have finished filling in the survey and will submit tomorrow once I've read it over once more. However the more I read into it the more it is glaringly obvious this consultation and direct.uk as it stands is flawed and poorly thought out.

Some of these may have been covered in this thread already but:

My main reasons for feeling this are

Security
Looking to provide a mark of trust yet it is suggested sites will be scanned for threats and the owner notified.
How can .uk be a sign of trust as suggested if it is leaving the domains up and running for periods of 24 hours or more. Therefore allowing visitors to a supposed secure site think it is secure when it may have had a virus for over 23 hours.

It should be down to the owner of the site to ensure it is secure and also down to the owner of the browsing device to ensure they have appropriate security measures inplace and use due diligence. It should not be down to the domain registry to act like a digital god and take down sites because the owners have been bullied into purchasing and then using yet another domain name.

Uk location.
What can a response to a uk postal address suggest other than the person wishing to register a domain has contact with someone at that address whether they have paid for local prescense or are staying at the address for a few days or have a mail redirect service in place. Perhaps having the owners national insurance number/passport number would be more secure but then would you be wishing to provide nominet with a NI number or passport number.

Trademarks,
The trademark process can be gamed as has been shown in previous domain releases. The system is only as fit for purpose as the checking process is. Additionally why can someone who has a US or perhaps benelux trademark then have more eligibility to a domain than the .co.uk/org.uk uk domain owner. Even if they all have access to a uk address...

Evidence of use.
"Domain names registered in the third level may constitute an unregistered right provided evidence of use could be shown prior to the qualifying date."

So from my understanding if two generic domains were purchased at similar times last year by two different owners one slaps up a poorly functioning minisite which has stolen content, unlicensed images and serves no real purpose other than to get visitors to jump from the site to google ads.
Where as the other has been planning, writing content, raising funding, developing a decent site and getting a business plan of the ground but did not have a site on during a nominet pre determined date.
Then the made for adsense minisite owner would be able to prove "use" where-as the other who is trying to build a site that will provide value to the digital economy would loose out and potentially have there business plan no longer feasible.

Reserved and protected names
"Accordingly, the only terms that cannot be registered in the third level are those that mirror existing second levels,"
this would not be able to work in the reverse and would cause confusion.

 

[Stephen]

qualified use?

Thanks for the link to Alex Blighs blog post. It provided yet another clear and consise opinion why this consultation is flawed.

I may be the only person here to have not filled in the consulation response but if I'm not and you are reading this, I urge you to fill it in now. It will be an hour or so well spent.

I have finished filling in the survey and will submit tomorrow once I've read it over once more. However the more I read into it the more it is glaringly obvious this consultation and direct.uk as it stands is flawed and poorly thought out.

.......
Evidence of use.
"Domain names registered in the third level may constitute an unregistered right provided evidence of use could be shown prior to the qualifying date."

So from my understanding if two generic domains were purchased at similar times last year by two different owners one slaps up a poorly functioning minisite which has stolen content, unlicensed images and serves no real purpose other than to get visitors to jump from the site to google ads.
Where as the other has been planning, writing content, raising funding, developing a decent site and getting a business plan of the ground but did not have a site on during a nominet pre determined date.
Then the made for adsense minisite owner would be able to prove "use" where-as the other who is trying to build a site that will provide value to the digital economy would loose out and potentially have there business plan no longer feasible........

Totally agree, fill out the consultation before it is too late!

On what is prior use?, I qualified my response with I don't think this is the way forward but requested clarification from Nominet, what is qualified use and they advised they have not decided and were looking for feedback from the consultation process on what it may mean? although I didnt think that was obvious from the way it was worded!

So you may wish to add some comments on what that may mean, if they were to need the phrase?

 

[Stephen]

2 days to go!

Make a difference.
Please make sure you have posted your comments to Nominet on .uk proposal
http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/policy-development/current-policy-discussions-and-consultations/consultation-new-uk

Or if you want to add additional comments please email them to [email protected]

Please act now time is nearly gone!

 

[anthony]

The weight of opinion now seems to be so heavily against the .uk proposal, this has to bring into question the credibility of the person at Nominet who proposed it in the first place.

It's turning into the poisoned chalice 'poll tax' decision of the domain name industry globally, and we all remember what price the Iron Lady paid for that one!

 

[viceroy]

The weight of opinion now seems to be so heavily against the .uk proposal, this has to bring into question the credibility of the person at Nominet who proposed it in the first place.

It's turning into the poisoned chalice 'poll tax' decision of the domain name industry globally, and we all remember what price the Iron Lady paid for that one!

Which is why everyone needs to push for transparency when it comes to the consultation replies... Maybe we can log all of our replies in duplicate somewhere else if anyone wants to?

 

[websaway]

I think the format of the feedback form , the way the questions are loaded has to be looked at also.

It's a bit like asking someone about introducing the death penalty.

Please tick one of the following

should the execution be carried out by

lethal injection
hanging
electrocution

Please tick one of the following

should the victiom be executed

immediately
after two weeks
after one year


If you don't want the death penalty introduced, how can you answer the above.

 

[WealdDomains]

If you don't want the death penalty introduced, how can you answer the above.

Maybe not everywhere, but fortunately there are several cases like that where the radio button selection is non-mandatory and you can complete the related comments box below by saying "I haven't selected an answer above because I believe the concept is fundamentally flawed".

 

[websaway]

Maybe not everywhere, but fortunately there are several cases like that where the radio button selection is non-mandatory and you can complete the related comments box below by saying "I haven't selected an answer above because I believe the concept is fundamentally flawed".

What I'm saying is, how many people are as astute as you.
Asked the question some people will just tick a box.

Would you rather be hanged or electrocuted ?

 

[Stephen]

Last day!

Maybe not everywhere, but fortunately there are several cases like that where the radio button selection is non-mandatory and you can complete the related comments box below by saying "I haven't selected an answer above because I believe the concept is fundamentally flawed".

Agree that is technically the case but I feel the vast majority of people completing will not be thinking of the motives of the person devising the questions on how they will be used to minipluate the answers!(if they repeat what they have done so far about .uk statistics) and simply answer without an overiding comment - plus it is quite tedious to add it every time.

Please make sure you have posted your comments to Nominet on .uk proposal
http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/policy-development/current-policy-discussions-and-consultations/consultation-new-uk

Or if you want to add additional comments please email them to [email protected] about the proposal since you filled in your original form.

This is why it is important to keep pushing for more responses on the this the last day of reponses and any last minute comments by email about transparency or any other comment you may wish to make to Nominet.

Note it is only open to end of business day, Monday 7th January for replies.

 

[foz]

I hope Lesley Cowley has the decency to resign over this. She can take Piers White with her too.

 

[RobM]

Shouldn't the first question be 'Do you think there should be a .uk?' If you answer no then the consultation can be left empty.

I can't help feeling this is a bit like asking what a unicorn's favourite food is - you have to agree with unicorns existing to answer the question.

 

[foz]

Shouldn't the first question be 'Do you think there should be a .uk?' If you answer no then the consultation can be left empty.

Buried at the end, under all the marketing spin.

Some may have been sold the idea by the time they got to question 11a.

A superb example of conning.