
Registry Agreement Termination Information Page - fanf2
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gtld-registry-agreement-termination-2015-10-09-en
======
nmridul
Surprised to see .theguardian tld there. They ask for donation and spend money
on this ?

~~~
tedivm
Lots of companies applied for "Brand TLDs", which are not the same as running
a full registrar and not nearly as expensive but did require that you show you
have the trademark for the name.

[https://icannwiki.org/Brand_TLD](https://icannwiki.org/Brand_TLD)

------
aequitas
> For the avoidance of doubt, ICANN's Preliminary Determination shall not
> prohibit ICANN from delegating the gTLD pursuant to a future application
> process for the delegation of top-level-domains, subject to any processes
> and objection procedures instituted by ICANN in connection with such
> application process intended to protect the rights of third parties.

So not really a graveyard. They can be registered again under the normal
conditions that apply.

With Google's mission to remove the URL from the browser and these TLD's often
being considered fishy (in terms of spam detection etc). I can understand
there is little value for companies to obtain/keep these other than prevent
squatting.

~~~
liamcardenas
> With Google's mission to remove the URL from the browser...

What evidence is there for this? I searched and I couldn't find anything.

Is this[1] what you are referring to? Because that, in my opinion, is just a
minor UI change -- not a fundamental shift in the browser experience, as you
seem to imply.

[1] [https://www.ghacks.net/2018/08/28/chrome-experiment-hides-
se...](https://www.ghacks.net/2018/08/28/chrome-experiment-hides-search-urls/)

~~~
tonysdg
Possibly this?

[https://www.wired.com/story/google-wants-to-kill-the-
url/](https://www.wired.com/story/google-wants-to-kill-the-url/)

------
pureliquidhw
Was interesting to look into Walmart's xn--4gq48lf9j.

Turns out that translates to chinese(?) characters for Number One Store:

[https://namestat.org/xn--4gq48lf9j](https://namestat.org/xn--4gq48lf9j)

------
tehlike
I never really got thr concept of having company names/projects/etc at the top
level.

~~~
fjsolwmv
Each one generated revenue for the DNS system administratots.

------
vizzah
Corporates mostly, who have with (little) time realised that it makes no
commercial sense to keep such an extension secured. We are yet to see
graveyard for some (most) of those novelty consumer-facing gTLDs. Give it
another couple of years.

------
ksec
It was the stupidest idea in Internet History. How about stopping .zip, .exe
.rar or .dll as gTLDs.

And the most important one .Web? Still no where to be seen.

~~~
dcbadacd
I'd love if oracle used .java to store documentation.

~~~
kencausey
s/store/expose/

------
gumby
ironic that '.active' is now inactive!

------
billpg
Remarkable for so many to have invested that amount of money, only to abandon
the project so quickly.

~~~
sdwisely
yeah, most of them you have to wonder why they bothered and others you have to
wonder why they would let go of them.

.mcdonalds for example seems like a strange one to let go of even if just for
easy memorable addresses people see in store.

perhaps their lack of easy recognition for the user as a url in that context.

------
yellowapple
[https://www.icann.org/resources/agreement/xn--
4gq48lf9j-2015...](https://www.icann.org/resources/agreement/xn--
4gq48lf9j-2015-07-31-en) ← What happened here? Seems like a real oddball from
Wal-Mart, of all places.

------
TheBill
I'm surprised at how many techco's let go of their own gtld - from a security
standpoint wouldn't it make sense for them to maintain their own SSL &
Domains, especially for deployed hardware - URL must match regex of domain &
SSL = list of valid certs?

~~~
duskwuff
There's no technical benefit to operating your own TLD for internal use. You
get all the same benefits under a normal domain name, without the operating
costs of a TLD.

