What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How to Make Your PC as Fast as the Day You Bought It view!
howlifeworks.com - What's the fastest way to restore a computer to its original blazing glory
81 Comments
- headzoo, on 04/07/2009, -1/+54It doesn't sound like companies have too much to worry about. The application fee to get a vanity TLD is $185k, plus another $25k each year after that. With those high costs, I doubt spammers are going to register domains like disney.con in hopes of caching in on typos.
It also seems unlikely that a company like Reebok is going to spend that kind of money to register nike.shoes just to piss off Nike. Plus it would just end up causing legal problems.
So I think their trademarks are pretty safe. It probably will cause consumer confusion though..
"Yeah, the site is nike.shoes."
"Okay.. so nike.shoes.com?"
"No, just .shoes."
"Okay.. .shoes.com"
"NO!" - dattaway, on 04/07/2009, -0/+51What a business. And you never really can "own" a domain, you simply lease it. Miss a payment and a squatter owns your traffic.
- Lynx77777, on 04/07/2009, -1/+33I'd drop $185,000 for apple.fanboi and put a picture of Kevin Rose on it.
- niner9, on 04/07/2009, -1/+21usatoday.*****
- theodric, on 04/07/2009, -2/+22I definitely need to register clownpenis.fart :D
http://www.gigglesugar.com/1965732 - jorisb, on 04/07/2009, -0/+16I wish they'd do more about domain squatters. Those pricks contribute zero to the internet.
- darlingt, on 04/07/2009, -1/+15FTA: "'Whatever is open to the imagination can be applied for,' says Paul Levins, ICANN's vice president of corporate affairs. 'It could translate into one of the largest marketing and branding opportunities in history.'"
Everybody ready for the influx of sites such as www.john.smith ? - wh3873, on 04/07/2009, -1/+14Third base
- jellygraph, on 04/07/2009, -0/+13Perhaps we should be more concerned about moving to IPv6 first, than to flood the internet with new web addresses
- scarwars, on 04/07/2009, -0/+13whatever happend to the xxx domain?
ICANN keeps turning the proposals down - o76923, on 04/07/2009, -1/+14Yes, but some companies that produce porn will willingly be on the .xxx domain. Most of the bigger porn sites already work with net nanny, public libraries, and other groups to make sure their porn doesn't get to children. Most pornographers aren't heartless monsters attempting to pray on the innocent, but instead are just doing another job.
- moges, on 04/07/2009, -1/+12Hi, welcome to the internet!
- RealJimShady, on 04/07/2009, -1/+12Please be joking, please!
- IneffablePolk, on 04/07/2009, -0/+11Bad idea.
- Scotty87, on 04/07/2009, -0/+10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_TLDs
You really had no idea what you were talking about huh? - phosphite, on 04/07/2009, -0/+9"A more likely scenario would be for a business just to register site Web addresses pairing their brand name with any new extensions, such as fios.telephone or gillette.razor. But even that defense could cost marketers up to $1.5 billion, estimates the not-for-profit Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse."
$1.5 BILLION just for a domain name? How is that possible! I thought domain name profiteering was bad enough, but that is just retarded. - sildude, on 04/07/2009, -0/+9How's life under the bridge, troll?
- emkaysmith, on 04/07/2009, -0/+9OTOH, some outfit already bought the rights to *MY NAME* as a website name with .com, .org, and .net extensions -- and they'll sell the rights to me for $1,500 -- so screw 'em. I'm in the process of setting up a personal, noncommercial website, and I can now get .info and .us to add to my name, so screw 'em TWICE.
Stockpiling names you're not even using, and that aren't even variations on your own company's name, should not be allowed. It's just a quick way to make a buck. - ThirdPrize, on 04/07/2009, -0/+9I suspect the TLD .sex will be the first to go.
- bryano, on 04/07/2009, -1/+10There's a freaking ***** ton of em ... all the country name endings ?
- RealJimShady, on 04/07/2009, -1/+9I for one think that top level domains should not be sold directly to companies, maybe that's just me. But I think the top level of the DNS hierarchy should stay as non-specific and subject-based as possible.
- scarwars, on 04/07/2009, -0/+8words can't even express the magnitude of dumbness you just shared with the rest of the world.
Even Miss Teen USA does a /facepalm - Rogor, on 04/07/2009, -0/+7This is basically an extortion scam against current companies with .com's etc, has been ever since day one.. they know that a x thousand? million? number of companies ip lawyers will put down the $25 for every domain extension version of their .com purely to protect their trademark/ip/threat of porn site going there. ICANN needs to be scapped for allowing this to happen, since they started with the alternative extensions its been a field day for spammers and crooks. $185k is a drop in the bucket for the right to extort almost every genuine company on the web. Not to mention the fact that the multitude of non .com extensions confuse the hell out of little old ladies and 3rd world internet users.
- Keloran, on 04/07/2009, -0/+7what is it with all these stories that should be on the "onion",
- arbulus, on 04/07/2009, -0/+5Homestarrunner.net - it's Dot Com!
- RealmDown, on 04/07/2009, -1/+6Not interesting or even surprising anymore as it happens more and more frequently.
Equally unsurprising is that the more it happens, the less I pay attention. Upcoming "most Diggs" is like the front page used to be and where I spend more and more time.
The front page is power user land now. - Pushkin, on 04/07/2009, -0/+5Still have issues filling in forms with my .NAME email addy
- muzzy, on 04/07/2009, -0/+5Ugh. Horrible, horrible, horrible.
We already have plenty of TLDs
It can already be a bitch to remember if that website was at .org, .com or .net, especially since so few follow the "rules" put in place on which to use.
Imagine if it could be any random TLD... lovely.
I'm sure Google would find this awesome. It'd add to that huge population of people who think that the only way to access a website is through google. I love that. "www.google.com > "YouTube" > Click Link" Hilarious. - magneteye, on 04/07/2009, -0/+5I wonder why we can't get any REAL good journalism about ***** like this? For example, expose the people that are behind all the ICANN and true ownership and so on... it's like a new mafia (Network Solutions?). There are people making millions off of doing next to nothing other than strong arming and forcing people to renew and purchase again and again. WTF kind of deal is this? Something is wrong with this picture if you ask me.
- GOVStooge, on 04/07/2009, -0/+5so we're going back to Usenet addresses???
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.bestiality.hamster.duct-tape - Metasquares, on 04/07/2009, -0/+4How about .name? That's been around for a while, and is meant for exactly what you're trying to do.
- muzzy, on 04/07/2009, -0/+4Whoa. Netscape & it looks like... MacOS 7.5? 8 maybe? Niiiice
- muzzy, on 04/07/2009, -0/+4He's not being racist, O7. We're spoiled and grew up with technology all around us. A 40 year old guy in China who is just starting to use the Internet is going to have a lot harder time grasping things.
You completely ignore Rogor's post just to cry "RACIST!".
That said, I completely agree with Rogor. It's going to be such a pain in the ass for anyone with a legit domain to try and protect it. - protogenxl, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3Dibs on .fart
- CynicalTyler, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3So many memories.
- muzzy, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3It's so long overdue... someone big really needs to get the ball rolling on IPv6.
- Washandje, on 04/07/2009, -1/+4They say that scammers will use this to cheat businesses out of their money, but I doubt that the scammers would be able to make the $185,000 application fee back anyway. Doesn't seem like a real problem. Still, I got dibbs on http://www.coca.cola
- CynicalTyler, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3So just get creative. Put "thereal" on the front of it. Or encode it in roman numerals. "Visit www.XVIICLIIXVIIIIXXDCXCCVIIIXIIIXCVVII.com!"
- Philbert, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3Sounds like a bad idea. Currently if you don't know a companies URL It's usually a fair bet that you can just enter their name with a .com on the end and you're good to go. If the URL ending can be anything you can forget doing that anymore.
- Firebird2k6, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3This is idiotic.
ICANN has always been about profit even though they are supose to be "nonprofit" - evisr8r, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3It's the land run man... as soon as it was available to buy/claim, people did. ITS AMURRRCUH!!!
- spazzcat, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3why not just get rid of TLDs and end domains in a .
- footodors, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3let's stop now with the cool .tel being the last new one.
- zyko, on 04/07/2009, -0/+3The problem discussed is other people getting your dot com domain with a different extension, such as digg.sucks, digg.porn, digg.me, digg.it, digg.er etc.
It creates legal and financial chaos because either you have to buy all these new domains to protect your brand or company, or sue when some ***** has no clue about trademarks and uses it for something.
So even though dotcom has top rank is terms or status, I have seen all major dotcom domains registered with biz, net, org, us, etc. - rpelayo, on 04/07/2009, -0/+2This idea has disaster written all over it. And what is it going to do to DNS servers ?
- CrankMyBlueSax, on 04/07/2009, -0/+2I really don't have an opinion on domain names, but I would like to say that the picture of the dude accompanying the story is kind of freaky. Mr Childers has a Damien Thorn meets Charles Manson look about him.
- Delvis, on 04/07/2009, -0/+2I work as a tech director in the advertising industry. You cannot IMAGINE how our clients are licking their chops to get at these new domains. So painful.
- Myztry, on 04/07/2009, -0/+2Stiff *****. Our company (AU$6 million) has an .com.au domain and another unrelated company has a .com domain. Who cares. A web address is simply a place where we can be found. An address. The world is not our domain. Either is it our namesakes.
Sure we would fight the use of our brand in the country our business if registered in. As multi-national should in the countries they are registered in. But Cereal is not a country. It is not a place where one can be addressed. Domains are not webmarks.
You can't have globally unique word based addresses. Imagine all thousands of collisions of Main Street. The would be Pharoahs need to realise the world is not their pyramid as much as they want to stand at the top. - arbulus, on 04/07/2009, -0/+2because . is the root.
-
Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is