Founder of Nominet against .uk proposal
Alex Bligh .uk consultation full feedback can be read at
http://www.youruk.org.uk/AlexBlighSeconddirectukresponse.pdf
Alex Bligh is a founder of Nominet and served as non-executive director of Nominet for 11 years up to 2007.
Extracts from the .uk feedback highlight some areas of concern for all .co.uk holders:
“The proposals pay insufficient attention to the rights and legitimate expectations of existing registrants.”
“In general, no persuasive case has been made to open up second level domain registrations at all, and the less than persuasive case that has been put fails to adequately weigh the perceived advantages of opening up second level domain registrations against the damage caused to existing registrants. In simple terms, the collateral damage outweighs the benefits.”
“Nominet’s initial consultation document only told side one of the story; it presented the advantages of opening registrations at the second level without putting forward any of the disadvantages. It is therefore completely unsurprising that it found favour with some respondents particularly those unfamiliar with domain names who would not be able to intuit the disadvantages themselves, rather like a politician asking voters whether they would like lower taxes without pointing out the consequences. The second consultation is little better – nowhere does it set out the disadvantages of the proposal as a whole to existing registrants.”
“Existing registrants would be disadvantaged. By presenting (probably falsely) registrations in the second level as more trustworthy, this implies registrations at the third level (i.e. all existing registrations) are somehow less trustworthy, or in some way ‘dodgy.'”
“These proposals risk introducing excess complexity. The most equitable path would be not to open up registrations at the second level at all.”
“There is simply no reason why those ejected from gov.uk should have preferential treatment over domain name holders in .uk...” "...I am afraid this proposal smells like Nominet pandering for support from government for its otherwise unpopular proposal.”
“To reiterate the point I have made before, this consultation and its ill-fated predecessor fail to put their points across in an even handed manner. That is they expound the advantages of Nominet’s proposal, without considering its disadvantages. That is Nominet’s prerogative, but if that is the course Nominet takes then it should not attempt to present the results of such a ‘consultation’ as representative, as their consultees will have heard only one side of the story.”
