There has been a lot of discussion about the coming .sucks new gtld and some of the potential pricing that could potentially come with it. Other extensions coming down the pipeline have gotten less publicity but certainly fall in a similar camp.
.Fail,.Exposed,.Gripe and .WTF are all extensions that no company or person really wants to be associated with to the left of the dot. Brands IMO should not participate in regging their names in these extensions. The reason being is you cannot protect against an almost infinite number of choices. Once you got your name in .sucks are you getting gripe,fail and exposed too ? That’s cool, pay $25,000 for your company.sucks, someone will pay reg free for your companyreally.sucks. $25,000 down the drain.
On top of the whole new gtld scenario, let’s not forget about good ole .com or country code. A story published yesterday in The Guardian showed one such battle. A company that does laser surgery tried to get a website taken down that it was sure was funded by a competitor.
High street optician Optical Express has lost a battle to have a website that strongly criticised its record in laser eye surgery closed down over what it claimed were defamatory attacks funded by a commercial rival.
The company’s lawyers tried to have the domain space of the site, Optical Express Ruined My Life, removed, but the bid was thrown out by the company that registered the campaign site’s name. Nominet, the internet registry company, said Optical Express’s main charge – that the website had been set up and funded by its main competitor, Optimax – was “extremely serious” and not proven.
Optical Express Ruined My Life (OERML) was set up in April 2012 by Sasha Rodoy, a campaigner seeking tighter regulation of laser eye surgery with the support of Labour MP John McDonnell. Rodoy had previously run a website called Optimax Ruined My Life, until she came to a confidential settlement with the firm.
Dismissing Optical Express’s claim, an expert panel formed by Nominet said allegations made by the company had been designed to “impugn the honesty and integrity” of Rodoy, who was named as the respondent in the case.
Read the full story here