During his remarks this weekend on C-Span Rep. Bob Goodlatte, who is the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, he promised a that the House would be holding a hearing on ICANN’s plan on expand the number of top level domains otherwise known as new gTLD’s.
“We are also going to hold a hearing on ICANN’s plan to dramatically expand the number of domain extensions, which could immensely complicate the ability of people from protecting their Intellectual Property rights and we are going to want to ask ICANN some pointed questions about this plan, and ask them why its is necessary and important to do that”
I’m not sure how a house hearing and the comments generated from such a hearing, which will be full of IP attorneys urging against it, will effect the time table for the roll out of the new gTLD’s.
It could be a major road block for the new gTLD extensions
You can watch the 30 Minute plus interview on C-Span here (discussion about 25 minutes into it)
New gTLD’s do nothing to benefit anyone other than squatters, registrars, and other similar parasites.
Hopefully, the government will do something right for a change and nip this fiasco-in-waiting in the bud.
I agree with the hearings, there are just too many of them in the works and it just adds more confusion, with the major benefit going to the registars who sell them. I have been on the internet since 1999 and until I started domaining a year ago, I didn’t even know that other extensions existed outside of com, net and org.
Who really benefits?
Landon White says
Could immensely ‘complicate the ability’ of people from protecting their Intellectual Property rights
Lets call them ….. GYPSY gTLD’s
You Have a REAL Taxi Cab ….
You have a GYPSY Taxi Cab …
The gypsy hides is the shadows …
WAITING TO STEAL the real TAXI’S TRAFFIC
by deception and Confusion you know like >.Co
LIKE A FAKE MONA LISA!
many people dislike .co
many people love .co
will the new extensions have as much love/hate
M. Menius says
The most damaging aspect of the new gtld’s proposal was the early announcement of “unlimited”, and/or 500 initial new tld’s.
This was apparently promoted so as to create excitement. In fact, it backfired because those in the know recognized the absurdity of that many new tld’s hitting the market. No real demand.
There needed to be some actual rationale for bringing multiple new tld’s to the net. But there just wasn’t. The “innovation” rationale was so utterly transparent.
the first domains funded NewSpaceAgency says
I feel that many of the new TLDs will not be the TLDs we (may) really need of, but the TLDs that some big companies want
Landonr White says
@ the first domains funded NewSpaceAgency
I feel that many of the new TLDs will not be the TLDs we (may) really need
Then the so called Big Companies will have to realize that this is the INTERNATIONAL PEOPLES FREE INTERNET and that special interest
group “favour’s” can NO LONGER be tolerated.
Jothan Frakes says
There was a similar amount of alacrity over the big problems that creating a commercial top level domain would introduce – for the creation of .COM in 1985.
The most immediate reaction to change is typically fear-based. That leaves out any room for discussions or thoughts in and around the upsides and opportunities.