- Impact
- 2,959
*
There seems to be a lot of debate about the proliferation of new TLDs.
What is your take on having to navigate a bunch of new TLDs?
Will they dilute .com?
Will it be too confusing?
My take: Large corporations will apply for their trademark TLDs and will begin using them in place of .com, .net, etc. These TLDs will be for company use only, for advertising purposes and in-house communications.
And then they will "educate" the public about their new TLDs by advertising the hell out of them. The general public has proven time and again that it is susceptible to the siren call of Madison Avenue.
Still, why could Apple.com decide that Apple.Apple might be better for its bottom line?
Answer: complete control of its TM.
I can see the slogan now: "If the website doesn't end in .Apple, it isn't Apple Computers." A whole new level of consumer confidence on the web could be achieved.
Other than its own domain holdings, Apple has no control over the .com TLD. So anyone who wants can reg Apple-Computer-Planet[dot]com and set up a phishing/scam site, but never will Apple-Computer-Planet.Apple be available to scammers. It seems that corporations are always worried about scammers who masquerade as their companies. It's bad for their reputations, and consumer confidence is often compromised.
Thus, corporations are likely to keep their TLDs closed to general registration. They may allow their employees to have an .Apple domain for business purposes (JohnSmith.Apple and [email protected]e), but would keep close tabs on house domains and emails.
Do I think the average person will apply for vanity TLDs? Not likely, unless the cost drops dramatically (which I doubt).
I think that ICANN ought to approve TM TLDs to those who qualify and who make the best case for having the TM TLD. In this case, Apple computers probably has a better case than Apple Records.
However, generic TLDs, such as .bank should be approved for a consortium registry that is operated much in the same manner as .edu. Banks would have to apply just like colleges and universities apply for .edu. For .edu, certain conditions (certification) must be met before a domain name is granted.
It would be dangerous (I think) to grant generic TLDs to individual corporations or even individuals, so I would hope that ICANN would put its own monetary considerations aside and grant revokable generic TLDs to non-profit registries with the best plan in place for developing a generic TLD.
In the wrong hands .bank could actually be dangerous to the banking industry.
I must admit, I feel squeamish about generic TLDs, given the history of .net, .org, .biz (what a yucky TLD), and .info. It seems that the original intent of these gTLDs were supposed to be very specific to their terms:
Therefore, .bank in the hands of a scammer could be disastrous.
I believe that corporate TLDs will soon be the norm; most of us don't like the idea of having to deal with so many TLDs, but I also remember the business community naysaying about the profitability of the internet. It wasn't that long ago when big business was saying that the internet was the just sizzle without the steak.
Sadly, those who were not nimble have simply faded away.
Large corporations who don't secure their TM TLD could find themselves competing with smaller corporations who own the same term (but for a different use).
So what is your take on the upcoming TLD changes/offerings?
*
There seems to be a lot of debate about the proliferation of new TLDs.
What is your take on having to navigate a bunch of new TLDs?
Will they dilute .com?
Will it be too confusing?
My take: Large corporations will apply for their trademark TLDs and will begin using them in place of .com, .net, etc. These TLDs will be for company use only, for advertising purposes and in-house communications.
And then they will "educate" the public about their new TLDs by advertising the hell out of them. The general public has proven time and again that it is susceptible to the siren call of Madison Avenue.
Still, why could Apple.com decide that Apple.Apple might be better for its bottom line?
Answer: complete control of its TM.
I can see the slogan now: "If the website doesn't end in .Apple, it isn't Apple Computers." A whole new level of consumer confidence on the web could be achieved.
Other than its own domain holdings, Apple has no control over the .com TLD. So anyone who wants can reg Apple-Computer-Planet[dot]com and set up a phishing/scam site, but never will Apple-Computer-Planet.Apple be available to scammers. It seems that corporations are always worried about scammers who masquerade as their companies. It's bad for their reputations, and consumer confidence is often compromised.
Thus, corporations are likely to keep their TLDs closed to general registration. They may allow their employees to have an .Apple domain for business purposes (JohnSmith.Apple and [email protected]e), but would keep close tabs on house domains and emails.
Do I think the average person will apply for vanity TLDs? Not likely, unless the cost drops dramatically (which I doubt).
I think that ICANN ought to approve TM TLDs to those who qualify and who make the best case for having the TM TLD. In this case, Apple computers probably has a better case than Apple Records.
However, generic TLDs, such as .bank should be approved for a consortium registry that is operated much in the same manner as .edu. Banks would have to apply just like colleges and universities apply for .edu. For .edu, certain conditions (certification) must be met before a domain name is granted.
It would be dangerous (I think) to grant generic TLDs to individual corporations or even individuals, so I would hope that ICANN would put its own monetary considerations aside and grant revokable generic TLDs to non-profit registries with the best plan in place for developing a generic TLD.
In the wrong hands .bank could actually be dangerous to the banking industry.
I must admit, I feel squeamish about generic TLDs, given the history of .net, .org, .biz (what a yucky TLD), and .info. It seems that the original intent of these gTLDs were supposed to be very specific to their terms:
.net = network
.org = non-profit organization
.biz = businesses
.info = general information (a term which was, in the first place, probably too nebulous to be successful)
Unfortunately, these registries made profit their main concern by opening these extensions open to everyone..org = non-profit organization
.biz = businesses
.info = general information (a term which was, in the first place, probably too nebulous to be successful)
Therefore, .bank in the hands of a scammer could be disastrous.
I believe that corporate TLDs will soon be the norm; most of us don't like the idea of having to deal with so many TLDs, but I also remember the business community naysaying about the profitability of the internet. It wasn't that long ago when big business was saying that the internet was the just sizzle without the steak.
Sadly, those who were not nimble have simply faded away.
Large corporations who don't secure their TM TLD could find themselves competing with smaller corporations who own the same term (but for a different use).
So what is your take on the upcoming TLD changes/offerings?
*
