.uk .UK Announced

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

What's your first choice of what should happen Edwin ?

I thought I'd already made that very clear in my 26 page position paper http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/ukpositionpaper.pdf

My first choice: no change to the status quo (.uk NEVER happens, and Nominet issue widely published statements to that effect)

My second choice (if they continue to insist on going ahead) would be to dramatically tinker with the release mechanism. Again, that's covered in my document.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

What they did in the past is not important.

Not true at all.

What they did in the past is ALL IMPORTANT.

If the top brass at Nominet feel that they are being given zero credit for anything achieved over the last 17 years (when in fact they have achieved a lot, grudging nay-sayers aside) then they're even more likely to go with a scorched-earth, nothing-to-lose approach to direct.uk.

If on the other hand direct.uk can be seen as more as a very grave but ultimately correctable error by an otherwise first-rate institution (which I believe it is) then perhaps there is still a slivver of hope that they may ultimately "do the right thing".

That is why I remain utterly convinced that the current direct.uk fiasco should not be used to retcon* Nominet's historic approach to the UK namespace and its excellent management of .co.uk.

*retcon = "retroactive continuity" (when a film, comic, book etc. series meddles with the "known history" i.e. the stuff that's already happened, in order to further the plot going forward)

 

[NigelNigel is verified member.]

Not true at all.

What they did in the past is ALL IMPORTANT.

If the top brass at Nominet feel that they are being given zero credit for anything achieved over the last 17 years (when in fact they have achieved a lot, grudging nay-sayers aside) then they're even more likely to go with a scorched-earth, nothing-to-lose approach to direct.uk.

If on the other hand direct.uk can be seen as more as a very grave but ultimately correctable error by an otherwise first-rate institution (which I believe it is) then perhaps there is still a slivver of hope that they may ultimately "do the right thing".

That is why I remain utterly convinced that the current direct.uk fiasco should not be used to retcon* Nominet's historic approach to the UK namespace and its excellent management of .co.uk.

*retcon = "retroactive continuity" (when a film, comic, book etc. series meddles with the "known history" i.e. the stuff that's already happened, in order to further the plot going forward)

"Scorched Earth" - We're not the ones who put a torch to the .co.uk domain market Edwin. They'll only not go ahead with direct.uk if they feel the backlash and possible repercussions are not worth the risk. They've run an effective monopoly for years. Any success has been solely due to the 10m registrants who gave them the income. That's due to the entrepreneurial spirit in the UK. This country likes domains and likes online activity - but a lot of those entrepreneurs are wishing they had used a .com instead.

I can see why you're calling it an 'error' on their part Edwin - but that's not the way I see it.

 

[WalkinDude]

Nigel well said.

 

[websaway]

I thought I'd already made that very clear in my 26 page position paper http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/ukpositionpaper.pdf

My first choice: no change to the status quo (.uk NEVER happens, and Nominet issue widely published statements to that effect)

My second choice (if they continue to insist on going ahead) would be to dramatically tinker with the release mechanism. Again, that's covered in my document.

I notice though that you give all the reasons why direct uk is not good for the economy or for current registrants and you quote a cost of 1billion pounds.

But failing the status quo, your suggested solution would not solve most of the problems you raise in your reasons for not introducing direct uk

However your proposals would go a long way to accommodating your position.
And it could even be taken that you are promoting the change.

You wrote..

In Conclusion
I urge Nominet to take this revised proposal on board, and consider adopting it - or a
close variant of it - as the basis of their .uk allocation process. I also urge them to bring
proposed .uk pricing in line with .co.uk registration fees, and to decouple the more
esoteric security and technical services from the base domain name registration.

 

[Stephen]

not retiring good old .co.uk

Originally Posted by Stephen
"Quite right, they may even go for full migration from .co.uk."

There is no conceivable way that would happen (if you mean that they would literally "retire" .co.uk in favour of .uk)

If you think the stink surrounding direct.uk is bad, imagine telling 4 million businesses they HAVE to rebrand (as in "are absolutely 100% forced to, because the URLs they've got printed on everything won't be valid much longer). Impossible.

That is not what I meant, I thought I went on to explain further on the post.

I believe the .co.uk would live beside the .uk with joint ownership.(no more cost)

No timetable to abandon .co.uk, no timetable to move to .uk.

No pressure to rebrand and their would be no other advantage of security etc for .uk, it would simply be a shorter domain if they decided to move over to .uk.

It would be the registrants choice to choice to use .co.uk or .uk with no cost or penalty forever.

 

[Stephen]

except Wales

Because a country can only have 1 cctld. There are no exceptions (except for IDN forms of ASCII cctld). That's how the domain system works anywhere in the world....

Except "Wales" the country would have 3

.co.uk
.wales
.cymru

 

[Stephen]

...."Phil Kingsland of .co.uk administrator Nominet said the extension is experiencing some of the biggest growth it has seen since the .com boom of a decade ago. Kingsland added that 150,000 new .co.uk domains are registered every month and that a survey showed that 80% of businesses in the UK prefer the .co.uk extension over the .com."....

Of the 150,000 new domains how many are re-registrations of expired/dropped domain names that are made by domainers?

 

[DomainPortfolio.ukDomainPortfolio.uk is verified member.]

I believe the .co.uk would live beside the .uk with joint ownership.(no more cost)

Quite right, they may even go for full migration from .co.uk.

What about Nominet tag holders like myself, along with other tag holders and registrants who live overseas, and who do not have a UK address to be verified from?

In both cases, I would not be able to register the .UK of my .co.uk's or .org.uk's as it currently stands. They can't migrate my .co.uk and .org.uk to .uk and make my .co.uk and .org.uk's no longer exist.

 

[Stephen]

But...

Personally, I think Nominet have done an excellent job of managing .co.uk.

- A lot cheaper than .com
- Prices stable for over a decade (in the face of significant inflation during that timeframe) unlike the .com price escalator that has driven regfees up every single year
- Gradual simplification of certain processes (e.g. no more certificates/paper transfers)
- DRS is generally regarded more positively by experts than the UDRP system
- .co.uk is a trusted, popular extension
- No restrictions on reselling domains (unlike some cctld) nor on domain ownership (number of names, location of owner, individual/company etc. - again, unlike some cctld)
- Great customer service (very friendly too) on the rare occasion something's gone wrong

That's what makes the contrast with direct.uk so damning. If they'd done a rubbish job with .co.uk then the way they've mis-managed .uk would have come as somewhat less of a surprise.

Nominet need to get back to what they're very, very good at (.co.uk) and stop mucking around with idiotic ideas that have been widely panned over the years and have no hope of succeeding now (.uk). They're more than welcome to dabble in genuinely new business lines (.wales/.cymru) because there's no risk of damage to their core business which was, is, and should remain .co.uk.

Agree with all except they can use resources to dabble with .wales.

Nominet need to be more transparent and if Nominet Trust in a transparent way wants to provide assistance to .wales oout of there £7 million surplus then that would be okay.

I would like to add Nominet could do better in the areas you state, they are fine in:

1 Could have made it cheaper still by not giving away £3m pa or at least as Ireland have done with .ie make it free for registered charities.
2. Could have reduced transfer cost of over 4 years registration to nil in line with most other tld's
3. DRS could be pushing mediation more and making more effort to solve this never ending situation of trademark holders stating they are missing out.
4. Not many restrictions I have seen with other tld's that wold make any sense to introduce anyway
5. Agree there service has been very good but they are reactive not proactive and they often use data to support there position without giving the full facts.

Plus Nominet could make a huge effort to be more transparent than tick the box attitude and blame sub contractors if anything goes wrong.

 

[Stephen]

Migration - as evolution

What about Nominet tag holders like myself, along with other tag holders and registrants who live overseas, and who do not have a UK address to be verified from?

In both cases, I would not be able to register the .UK of my .co.uk's or .org.uk's as it currently stands. They can't migrate my .co.uk and .org.uk to .uk and make my .co.uk and .org.uk's no longer exist.

Migration is of ownership rights of .co.uk to .uk not dumping .co.uk.

(I only used the word migration as it is Nominet alternative to .uk being a new tld)

There would be no need for UK address.

That is a Nominet invention they made up when they realized what they originally suggested was illegal, namely making it a condition to own a UK that you had to be in the UK.

There is no need for such a costly security measure that would produce no real benefit, there should be nothing to the .uk except it is shorter!

There would I acknowledge be a problem for .org.uk owners but if you look to the purpose of an .org.uk when it was registered it was clearly for non profit organizations.

I would however hope that Nominet would create more free mediation for .org.uk owners to aquire the equivalent .co.uk (and by linkage the .uk) .

 

[DomainPortfolio.ukDomainPortfolio.uk is verified member.]

There would be no need for UK address.

That is a Nominet invention they made up when they realized what they originally suggested was illegal, namely making it a condition to own a UK that you had to be in the UK.

Stephen, it's fine you saying there's no need for a UK address, but it's not you making the rules, Nominet have stated that as it currently stands (unless they change it), a UK address will be needed to verify the domain registrant is based in the UK.

If it remained that way, I don't have a UK address to be able to be verified, so I wouldn't be able to register any fresh .UK domains, nor could I apply for the .UK's of any of my .co.uk's, nor could they migrate any of my domains to .UK

 

[Stephen]

Stephen, it's fine you saying there's no need for a UK address, but it's not you making the rules, Nominet have stated that as it currently stands (unless they change it), a UK address will be needed to verify the domain registrant is based in the UK.

If it remained that way, I don't have a UK address to be able to be verified, so I wouldn't be able to register any fresh .UK domains, nor could I apply for the .UK's of any of my .co.uk's, nor could they migrate any of my domains to .UK

Agree I not making up the rules but the proposal rules should not be taken as they are written in stone.

I originally quoted the proposal rules on the subject of new .co.uk and another post stated that Nominet could change the .uk proposal rules and I agreed "yes" they could.

So it developed into a hypothitical situation of what other terms Nominet might change.

Don't worry if they ever did bring in the need for a UK address there would be plenty of people here would do it for a pint or 2 of Guinness!

 

[AlienAlien is verified member.]

The whole thing is still hypothetical though is it not?! LOL.

 

[Stephen]

The whole thing is still hypothetical though is it not?! LOL.

Until 26th February 2013 Nominet Board meeting plus the delay in making the announcement which has typically been 2 weeks before release of board minutes.

Lets hope they make this annoucement a bit quicker than normal!

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

I see a new campaign for agreatplacetobe.co.uk was launched today:

http://twitter.com/#!/outsideline/status/296736116718051328

 

[Marcoose]

I see a new campaign for agreatplacetobe.co.uk was launched today:

http://twitter.com/#!/outsideline/status/296736116718051328

"I sell a very British product – traditional sweets – so a trusted web address is the key to my success.”

Too bad the people that supplied you with your web address don't consider it to be trusted, love!

 

[anthony]

I see a new campaign for agreatplacetobe.co.uk was launched today:

http://twitter.com/#!/outsideline/status/296736116718051328

Too bad that Nominet have converted just their web addresses to images on the home page.

Better than that though, tradeplumbing.co.uk obviously feel the need to have a .com address, just in case maybe: http://clayton-horsnell.com/. Can't blame them, as .com is also a great place to be too! :-D

 

[viceroy]

Is there an online link to listen to that?

I haven't found the ad online yet but will be in touch with Lincs fm tomorrow anyway. The whole new advertising campaign started today. It really hurts that they can go ahead and spend on advertising for .co.uk in nation wide media but do relatively little for direct.uk consultation which has sailed...

Apart from these latest developments and with a bit of introspection i've come to realise that, I, and every other affected stakeholder that hasn't taken up the option of membership and being more vocal where applicable has some degree of responsibility for the current state of affairs. I seem to recall that after the last egm stakeholders were going to take a closer look at all policy development (special resolution 1b? ordinary resolution 4a?) and hold the senior management to account for their actions if they erred. I think I've put too much trust in the Nominet board (the middle management and frontline staff tend to be pretty good overall in my experience) and I hope we can get some changes this year.

 

[viceroy]

Too bad that Nominet have converted just their web addresses to images on the home page.

Better than that though, tradeplumbing.co.uk obviously feel the need to have a .com address, just in case maybe: http://clayton-horsnell.com/. Can't blame them, as .com is also a great place to be too! :-D

and .org.uk and .me.uk. I wonder what he'd say if asked why he registered .org.uk and .me.uk? After all, they're not commercial extensions. Maybe it's because he doesn't have a trademark and thinks that registering all possible exts. will protect him?