Introduction of .uk - Don't Do It!

[foz]

notagreatplacetobe.co.uk and notnominet.org.uk are currently pointing to that.co.uk

Hazel

I don't think thefutureof.co.uk? and the above examples would drive much traffic. Was thinking engagement and branding for a public awareness site for the consultation period.

 

[khalid]

Just done the survey, didn't take that long, just wrote in plain English it was a bad idea.

Still think a petition would be a good idea.

 

[Edwin]

This battle won't stop until Nominet back down and change or give up on their proposal.

Even if you've already alerted some people about their proposal, please consider taking a little time to reach out to more folks, whether on Twitter, blogs, other forums, LinkedIn, Facebook or whatever tools you can find to get the word out.

 

[khalid]

Does anyone have a direct e-mail address for all those on the Nominet board?

 

[monaghan]

Anyone had a reply from their MP yet?

 

[Brassneck]

Anyone had a reply from their MP yet?

Without having to wade through masses of info on here is there a 1 page document summarising the proposal and why it may not be a good idea?

To engage MPs etc something very short and to the point is needed as they get hundreds of letters every day.

Stephen

 

[Edwin]

Without having to wade through masses of info on here is there a 1 page document summarising the proposal and why it may not be a good idea?

To engage MPs etc something very short and to the point is needed as they get hundreds of letters every day.

Stephen

The second page of my position paper is meant to be just that as it's all bullet points - that's what it was there for. The rest of the document is there as support/background for the bullets.

Or did you need something even simpler?

 

[monaghan]

I sent my MP a link to the recent youtube video - http://youtu.be/PD6vIHG_R-w as this seems to provide a simple overview. Additionally a personal message outlining potential impact to the local business / charities I work with along with links to the Nominet proposal and of course a disclaimer that the impact also would hit my business and a little of my 25+ year Internet usage background to show some credibility.

I'm not holding my breath as he didn't seem to understand any of the cookie issues I tried to raise with him before, but if enough of us rattle cages, we might find someone wanting to listen.

 

[websaway]

The lesson being learned from this exercise is

If you're planning a heist, make sure it's done before you get rumbled.

 

[Brassneck]

The second page of my position paper is meant to be just that as it's all bullet points - that's what it was there for. The rest of the document is there as support/background for the bullets.

Or did you need something even simpler?

I'll check it when I am back next week. If it doesn't get over the key message about this being potentially a bad idea in about 15 seconds then I doubt any mp will be bothered. You probably have to get it past their researchers in the first place.

Stephen

 

[Brassneck]

Actually I just read the bullet points. I worked 20 years in civil service and my gut feeling is that if I read through those I wouldn't really understand why it 'could' be a bad idea.

I would concentrate on a couple of the key issues and particularly with this govt everything is considered in terms of whether it will benefit or harm the economy. A news headline about potential cost for business would most likely be an effective way of gaining attention.

Stephen

 

[Edwin]

More to read

http://www.affiliates4u.com/news/2012/11/nominets-uk-domain-name-fiasco/

 

[Brassneck]

More to read

http://www.affiliates4u.com/news/2012/11/nominets-uk-domain-name-fiasco/

Just wondering in your article about the lack of trademarks you mention for 'three' and 'Tiscali'. Isn't it '3' and does Tiscali actually still exist in the UK - thought that everything is under Talk Talk. This might sound pedantic but if I am right might help people pick holes if you are not factually correct.

Thanks
Stephen.

 

[Stephen]

New Article

Edwin

http://www.affiliates4u.com/news/2012/11/nominets-uk-domain-name-fiasco/


Great new article, I think it set out position more powefully than your position paper.

Stephen

 

[Rob_F]

Looks like Everthing Everywhere (formally T-mobile/Orange) wont be getting ee.uk, despite them securing ee.co.uk at auction just last year, or acquiring it on aftermarket. Their main website is at ee.co.uk.

They have just completed the rebrand to EE, at a cost of £50,000,000, including £35mil on 700 shop refits.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...ias/5042284.article+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

They don't appear to own a TM for EE.

Bet they are chuffed to bits! Another one for the Nominet (potential) victim list.

- Rob

 

[Edwin]

three.co.uk is the URL they currently use, so they won't get three.uk as the plans currently stand.

 

[websaway]

three.co.uk is the URL they currently use, so they won't get three.uk as the plans currently stand.

I see the proposals as being indefensible and should be pulled before more damage is done.

 

[Aiden Roberts]

Excellent article Edwin. I wonder how many new trademarks have been registered or applied for since this announcement?

 

[Edwin]

Excellent article Edwin. I wonder how many new trademarks have been registered or applied for since this announcement?

None. They've anticipated that with a cutoff date.

 

[Aiden Roberts]

None. They've anticipated that with a cutoff date.

Trying to get my head around whether that's a good thing or bad?

One side of the coin says it prevents people from hijacking any further domains by way of TM'ing but the other says it prevents existing domain owners from from protecting themselves, I clearly need to read the proposal in it's entirety.