

ICANN reveals objections to proposed top level domains - microwise
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2016559/icann-reveals-objections-to-proposed-top-level-domains.html

======
samarudge
Actual list is available here

<https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Early+Warnings>

Looking through, the first thing that I noticed is the number of domains
rejected by Australia, looking through the PDFs the reasons all seem valid,
it's just strange that Australia is the one rejecting them.

~~~
18pfsmt
Interesting:

-Argentina and Chile object to Patagonia Inc's attempt at .patagonia

-India objects to .bible

-Nigeria objects to Delta Airlines attempt at .delta

-China objects to .shangrila from some hotel chain by the same name

-Australia objects to most everything else including .sucks

~~~
paulgb
> Australia objects to most everything else including .sucks

It's important to note that this isn't because it offends them, but because
whoever holds it can basically print cash once brands start realizing they
need to register (brand).sucks before anyone else does.

~~~
18pfsmt
Fair enough. They appear to object with 1 of following 2 reasons:

1) _Company X does not appear to specify sufficient mechanisms to allow
communities to protect their names and reputations from misuse at the second
level, except through defensive registrations._

or

2) _Company X is proposing to exclude any other entities, including potential
competitors, from using the TLD.

Restricting common generic strings for the exclusive use of a single entity
could have unintended consequences, including a negative impact on
competition._

------
Hupo
Gotta say I have to give props to Australia for objecting to most of these.
Some relevant reading:

[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120613/12491719310/rip-
of...](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120613/12491719310/rip-off-
highlights-top-level-domain-scrum.shtml)

[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121116/02455021073/domain...](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121116/02455021073/domain-
shakedown-companies-warned-about-dangers-unprotected-sx.shtml)

------
lalc
Seeing a common theme in the LLC applicants whose generic choices of
profession-related words Australia has objected to...

    
    
      Delta Mill, LLC
      Snow Sky, LLC
      Koko Moon, LLC
      Atomic Pipe, LLC
      Corn Sunset, LLC
      Dog Bloom, LLC
      Hidden Way, LLC
      Knob Town, LLC
      Spring Frostbite, LLC
      Victor North, LLC
      Blinky Sky, LLC
    

and so on. Did someone actually get a random name generator and then register
all those shell companies?

------
smoyer
Three cheers for Australia! I think our experience with the last set of TLDs
show us that having more isn't necessarily better. Think of how many domains
you'll need to capture to protect your brand (Australia's main objection).

I think the other way around this is to boycott the new TLDs ... if anyone
wants to collaborate on a couple browser plug-ins I'd be more than happy to
help.

~~~
Jach
Why would I care about owning all the (brand).(tld) pages? If I own .com, it's
enough. If someone is trying to be my brand without my permission, there are
already legal ways of dealing with that. If they're just another brand in a
different space of the market with the same name, I don't care. Apple the tech
company is quite different from Apple the apple company. If someone makes
(brand).sucks, that's really no different to (brand)sucks.com.

------
nulluk
Can someone cross reference this to the list of gTLD that were initially
submitted? To see what ones weren't objected to?

~~~
Ogre
This is the rough list of domains that no one objected to:

<https://gist.github.com/4145536>

I didn't find a nicely formatted CSV of complaints, all I had was the page
itself, which I pasted into a spreadsheet and extracted a list from that (the
HTML wasn't consistently formatted either or I would've done something with
that) I did find a CSV of domain proposals here:
[http://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/reveal/strings...](http://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/reveal/strings-1200utc-13jun12-en.csv)

I did some processing on both to get them to all lower case, removed spaces
and translations as best I could, and ran cat (both files) | sort | uniq -c
over both of them, at which point, any line that starts with " 1 " is a line
that only appears in one file. So, the list I gisted is "mostly" domains that
no one complained about, but it may also contain domains that someone
complained about that weren't actually proposed, and several steps along the
way were error prone so it definitely has other mistakes. The domains with
non-latin characters may not have worked properly in particular. I might've
spent a little more time on it, but I'm on my way out the door.

IE don't make any business decisions based on this list :)

EDIT: err, wound up back in the door. And noticed I totally screwed up the one
I pasted in (forgot the "sort" on the last run I did, duh.) It's better now.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
Apparently some Chinese company tried to get the chinese for ".gov" or
".government", and the Republic of China[1] and Hong Kong[2] governments are
unhappy, to say the least!

[1]
[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/GOVID...](https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/GOVIDN-
TW-56316.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353452204000)

[2]
[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/GOVID...](https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/GOVIDN-
HK-94344.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353451730000)

------
masenf
I thought it was interesting that Saudi Arabia was opposed to granting certain
gTLDs on the grounds that they would likely be used to host content which
their culture considers offensive. To me, it seems like if that government
could censor all* homosexuality and "substances detrimental to public order
and morals" by blocking _.gay and_.wine, then that would be in its interest.

------
ohashi
Interesting to see Donuts co didn't get mentioned once despite applying for
320 gTLDs.

~~~
kijeda
That is because Donuts applied for its gTLDs through a number of LLCs with
names like "Delta Mill, LLC" and "Snow Sky, LLC". You can find a great many of
them objected to.

~~~
ohashi
Ah that makes more sense.

------
coopdog
I actually think some TLDs like .book, .app, .movie, could be useful. Often
for movies you see they've used domains like reavingzombiesmovie.com, which
would be better as reavingzombies.movie, and would let someone else buy
reavingzombies.app or .book, for an entirely different product that happens to
share a name

All of these TLDs should only be sold to companies who plan to let people buy
domains from them

The idea of Amazon owning .book or Apple owning .app just seems bad for the
internet as a whole

------
Groxx
I can't decide if I think the TLDs should be first-come, first-served like
regular domain names are (unless someone cares to correct me? I don't know
specifics), or if I'd love there to be precedence blocking people from
registering generic words. If you can register banana.com, why not .banana?
But then .banana would certainly be squatted for someone holding out for
millions against Chiquita, and that's just crappy for everyone.

------
Evbn
This whole gLTD thing is stupid and will cause horrible confusion and
scamming.

There should be .global or .world and each country should pick a translation
or two of "global", and they should all be aliases for each other. Basically
just make non-US-specific version .com for all uses.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
What about just ".g"? It's a single latin letter, easy to say, and short
enough that non-English speakers will be able to deal with it.

