ICANN once in a while approves a new top level domain (TLD).  The latest one that is coming up is .tel (with a sunrise period for existing trademark holders starting December 3, 2009).  I consider this a form of highway robbery.  Every time ICANN does this existing domain and trademark owners essentially have no choice but to also register their domain under this new TLD or risk having someone squat their name.  On the one hand one might argue that the price is low enough so that folks should not complain.  But it does add up (.org, .net., .com are must haves in any case and .mobi, .us, .info and .biz probably too) and the cost is not just the annual fee for the domain.  It is also having to stay on top as to whether a new TLD is becoming available.  And with some of the more offbeat ones, such as .tel, the cost may include having to use a second registrar.  All of that might be acceptable if these TLDs offered significant benefits for the net ecosystem as a whole.  But I don’t believe that is the case. Theoretically, adding a TLD expands the namespace.  But practically, the main result is a potential for confusion.  That was already true within the initial set of TLDs as used to be dramatically illustrated by whitehouse.com which at one point was a porn site.  I can think of very few examples of companies that built a meaningful web presence on a domain name that was only available because of an additional TLD (del.icio.us of course comes to mind).  The only ones really profiting are the folks who operate the new TLDs and the registrars.  So please ICANN – no more TLDs!

ICANN once in a while approves a new top level domain (TLD).  The latest one that is coming up is .tel (with a sunrise period for existing trademark holders starting December 3, 2009).  I consider this a form of highway robbery.  Every time ICANN does this existing domain and trademark owners essentially have no choice but to also register their domain under this new TLD or risk having someone squat their name.  On the one hand one might argue that the price is low enough so that folks should not complain.  But it does add up (.org, .net., .com are must haves in any case and .mobi, .us, .info and .biz probably too) and the cost is not just the annual fee for the domain.  It is also having to stay on top as to whether a new TLD is becoming available.  And with some of the more offbeat ones, such as .tel, the cost may include having to use a second registrar.  All of that might be acceptable if these TLDs offered significant benefits for the net ecosystem as a whole.  But I don’t believe that is the case. Theoretically, adding a TLD expands the namespace.  But practically, the main result is a potential for confusion.  That was already true within the initial set of TLDs as used to be dramatically illustrated by whitehouse.com which at one point was a porn site.  I can think of very few examples of companies that built a meaningful web presence on a domain name that was only available because of an additional TLD (del.icio.us of course comes to mind).  The only ones really profiting are the folks who operate the new TLDs and the registrars.  So please ICANN – no more TLDs!