The Web's ruling body says it won't allow new top-level-domains until trademark risks are minimised
It's two years since the largest expansion of the internet's address system was first announced. The board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) agreed in the summer of 2007 to allow any organisation to apply for its own generic top-level-domain (gTLD), which could be used instead of established suffixes such as ".com" or ".org". In effect, the decision meant that Virgin could apply for ".train", or Google could apply for ownership of ".google".
But ICANN has yet to agree the small print. The delay, according to ICANN pressure group the Step-by-Step Initiative, has commercial ramifications. A report the group issued earlier this month criticises ICANN's apparent indecisiveness. "Applicants cannot prepare serious solutions with a timeline [that] shifts with each ICANN meeting. Is this an effective outcome from a three-year development cycle?"
ICANN spokesman Brad White says the organisation is concerned primarily with the potential problems of cybersquatting and won't allow applications until these risks have been minimised. "The simple fact is that we will not open up the new gTLD application process until we've adequately addressed that issue," says White.
"Among other things, we're exploring the possibility of a more rigorous form of application review, which might more clearly call for evidence of an applicant's qualification for a given gTLD," he adds. Step-by-Step, which is supported by CORE, a not-for-profit association of domain name registrars, says ICANN should begin to allow applications from December 2009. ICANN says it won't be ready to start the process until at least February 2010.
It's a sizable challenge for incoming ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom, who replaces the retiring Paul Twomey. Beckstrom, who has a history in IT security, was formally introduced to stakeholders at ICANN's 35th international meeting in Sydney last week. One former colleague is said to have warned him that his last role as director of the National Cybersecurity Center [US] will look like a "walk in the park" compared with the complexities of running ICANN. There could be some truth in that. One Sydney delegate summed up ICANN's conference mood as typically "controversial", with some "urging to proceed, others urging to delay".
Proponents of a delay, according to Joe White, co-founder of domain registrar Gandi.net, are concerned about the potential for trademark disputes. "The delay to the process has been [about dealing] with legal issues in a way that avoids large costs and extra work." ICANN has also been careful to avoid technical problems with the internet's infrastructure, adds White. "We certainly wouldn't want the new names to bring down the whole naming system. That won't happen, but they wanted to be very careful about its implementation."
The release of new, generic TLDs is intended to free up the internet address system for "maximum social and economic value", according to ICANN. But the plan has many detractors, not only as a result of the increased fear of cybersquatting. Controversial name applications, for example, such as ".god" or ".nazi", will be assessed on a case by case basis, but this has angered Net libertarians who are against any form of online censorship.
There has also been some criticism over the price of an application, which is likely to be $185,000. "A cost recovery figure," according to ICANN, but nonetheless a considerable outlay for the average small business. The size of the fee, according to ICANN, is also about deterring cybersquatters and small firms with a legitimate claim to a word that also happens to be a global brand.
Some observers have been quick to question whether the Web's infrastructure can deal with a sudden influx of new addresses. According to Patrick Vande Walle, incompatibility problems could mean that some software might struggle to process the new gTLDs. "It does not make sense now for ICANN just to say it is someone else's problem. If the new gTLDs cannot be processed on the client platforms, this will mean their acceptance by the user community will be low. This means less revenue for registries, registrars and finally ICANN."
Gandi.net's White says there will be good opportunities for small firms once the applications window opens next year. Any "community" application would get priority over a pure commercial application, he says. "If B&Q went after '.kitchen', but also a trade body for kitchen installers, then in theory the latter would win," says White. "Small businesses will be able to benefit from associating themselves with more specific extensions in the future, for example 'kitchens.london', or 'mycompany.kitchen'," he adds.
Meanwhile, Beckstrom appears to understand very well the political sensitivities inherent in policing such a vital part of the Web's infrastructure. "The system on the whole is healthy, but also strained, and part of the strains are natural and part of the democratic process," Beckstrom told. "The process may be noisy, but a stable internet is what has come out of ICANN... All of us are humbled by the process. No one is in control, so everyone is in control."
Posted 1 July 2009 : Director.co.uk
