.UK - A botch?

[foz]

Agreed, but there's a difference between a short sunrise period and five years. What other TLD introduction had anything remotely like a 5 year sunrise period? I can't recall one.

But it's not a new TLD (ccTLD) introduction. It's been sold once and those owners and being offered first dibs to move up a level.

 

[Murray]

mdb, you act like the .uk domaining door is shut to new comers, it's not.

You don't even need any technical knowledge or money either, just a keen interest & some time to devote.

Sites like dropsystem and domainview have made it very easy to start, providing droplists, public catching & hosted catching; everything you need.

Also acorn members are extremely helpful and welcoming to newcomers.

I wouldn't say anyone should come in now looking to make a fulltime living of course.. but as an enjoyable money making hobby, I don't think you can beat dropcatching.

 

[websaway]

Haven't you heard, there are 1,000 totally new extension including .london / .wales and more coming, go take your crack of the whip on DAY 1, the same as some did 5-10-15-20 yrs ago on .*.uk.

I think for all that has been written on this subject this is a brilliant abbreviated summing up.

 

[mdb]

No, absolutely not.

It doesn't come across that way, and it's completely understandable why or if you took that view. I'm a realist first.

However .co.uk was sold as the prime real estate, and now they effectively building a 2nd story ontop of your land and billing it as the new premium real estate.

But it's not a new TLD (ccTLD) introduction.

Ok, these arguments sound more like .uk is, for all intents and purposes, replacing the .co.uk namespace. That's fine, no argument there, so do it.

Give all .co.uk registrants the .uk entension and cease the sale / use of the .co.uk namespace.

1. Any .co.uk web address should forward through to .uk - Nominet could manage this.

2. No need to rebrand anything. .co.uk and .uk are essentially the same.

3. No need to double domaining costs.

4. No confusion. You guys (and even me) understand the UK namespace. There are 10,000s who don't and it WILL cause confusion.

5. It reduces DRS and legal cases.

6. You don't need a sunrise period, 1 week is the same as 5 years as is the same as 10 years.

7. It takes the guess work out of whether .uk will take off, and moreover it doesn't matter if it will become the dominant namespace in the UK.

8. It's 100% transparent. There's no need for all this conjured up rubbish about opportunity and competition. Well, that's not strictly true, it will create new opportunities for Nominet, domain name companies, domainers and IP lawyers.

9. It would have given some people 12 months of their life back.

mdb, you act like the .uk domaining door is shut to new comers, it's not.

Well, effectively it is? "Good" generic domain names will be unobainable to newbies (from the point of view of FTR) even when the .co.uk namespace is parked. It's bad for competition, even though I recognise many of you guys have a vested in interest of not wanting to dilute your portfolios.

Imagine when Apple release the iPhone 6, what would happen if new a new share allocation were only open to investors who were invested in Apple throughout the iPhone's development? And let's for argument's say all those investors had five years to decide if they wanted those shares (and had the capital to do so) based on the market's adoption?

Incidently, and granted it's only one example, but I own the .co.uk & .org.uk domains that a big corporate want (registered in good faith). I dare say they would support my argument, and they would love to be able to compete on a level playing field for the .uk. Actually, they probably wouldn't. They probably think they are 110% justified to own it because of who they are, but that's another story. If they "won it", it would reduce the value of my 2 domains by thousands. But hey ho, that's competition.

You don't even need any technical knowledge or money either, just a keen interest & some time to devote.

Sites like dropsystem and domainview have made it very easy to start, providing droplists, public catching & hosted catching; everything you need.

Also acorn members are extremely helpful and welcoming to newcomers.

I wouldn't say anyone should come in now looking to make a fulltime living of course.. but as an enjoyable money making hobby, I don't think you can beat dropcatching.

Not disagreeing with any of that, and good luck to all involved

I'd still like to know people's thoughts on the folks who run commercial businesses on .org.uk domains because the .co.uk's were tied up by domainers. Is it a case of tough titties, and should .org.uk domain name registrants have been basically ignored?

 

[websaway]

It doesn't come across that way, and it's completely understandable why or if you took that view. I'm a realist first.



Ok, these arguments sound more like .uk is, for all intents and purposes, replacing the .co.uk namespace. That's fine, no argument there, so do it.

Give all .co.uk registrants the .uk entension and cease the sale / use of the .co.uk namespace.

1. Any .co.uk web address should forward through to .uk - Nominet could manage this.

2. No need to rebrand anything. .co.uk and .uk are essentially the same.

3. No need to double domaining costs.

4. No confusion. You guys (and even me) understand the UK namespace. There are 10,000s who don't and it WILL cause confusion.

5. It reduces DRS and legal cases.

6. You don't need a sunrise period, 1 week is the same as 5 years as is the same as 10 years.

7. It takes the guess work out of whether .uk will take off, and moreover it doesn't matter if it will become the dominant namespace in the UK.

8. It's 100% transparent. There's no need for all this conjured up rubbish about opportunity and competition. Well, that's not strictly true, it will create new opportunities for Nominet, domain name companies, domainers and IP lawyers.

9. It would have given some people 12 months of their life back.



Well, effectively it is? "Good" generic domain names will be unobainable to newbies (from the point of view of FTR) even when the .co.uk namespace is parked. It's bad for competition, even though I recognise many of you guys have a vested in interest of not wanting to dilute your portfolios.

Imagine when Apple release the iPhone 6, what would happen if new a new share allocation were only open to investors who were invested in Apple throughout the iPhone's development? And let's for argument's say all those investors had five years to decide if they wanted those shares (and had the capital to do so) based on the market's adoption?

Incidently, and granted it's only one example, but I own the .co.uk & .org.uk domains that a big corporate want (registered in good faith). I dare say they would support my argument, and they would love to be able to compete on a level playing field for the .uk. Actually, they probably wouldn't. They probably think they are 110% justified to own it because of who they are, but that's another story. If they "won it", it would reduce the value of my 2 domains by thousands. But hey ho, that's competition.



Not disagreeing with any of that, and good luck to all involved

I'd still like to know people's thoughts on the folks who run commercial businesses on .org.uk domains because the .co.uk's were tied up by domainers. Is it a case of tough titties, and should .org.uk domain name registrants have been basically ignored?

Don't you think you are coming to the argument a little too late ?
All the things you are saying have been posted in their thousands on this forum over the last year, I don't really see what you are trying to achieve.

 

[mdb]

Don't you think you are coming to the argument a little too late ?
All the things you are saying have been posted in their thousands on this forum over the last year, I don't really see what you are trying to achieve.

Well, I'm not a Nominet member, websaway. I severely doubt my voice would have carried any weight amongst the swathes of domainers in the discussions. Domainers were up in arms when .uk was first mentioned, many still disagree to it, so it remains a contentious issue.

I hardly think my view would be a popular one based on that fact this forum is the nucleus of UK domaining dicussion. However, given the great forum that Acorn is, it's also the main place for UK namespace discusssion, hence my spiel.

I've not had my finger on the pulse of discussions throughout the last year. I've read updates here and there, so I'm simply giving my reaction to Nominet's press release. The .uk namespace won't affect my business in a drastic way - the only way it could have impacted on me (beyond doubling my registration fees) was with the domain I own that the corporate wants. Looks like I "won" on that one. I'm not basing my retirement on that, so it's not a big deal to me, but I recognise it will be a big deal to 100,000s of other folks.

The bottom line is I think five years is too long, .org.uk registrants should have been catered for to some degree, and there should have been more opportunity for competition if it's going to exist in conjunction with .co.uk. That said, I'm under no illusion that anything will change

 

[websaway]

Well, I'm not a Nominet member, websaway. I severely doubt my voice would have carried any weight amongst the swathes of domainers in the discussions. Domainers were up in arms when .uk was first mentioned, many still disagree to it, so it remains a contentious issue.

I hardly think my view would be a popular one based on that fact this forum is the nucleus of UK domaining dicussion. However, given the great forum that Acorn is, it's also the main place for UK namespace discusssion, hence my spiel.

I've not had my finger on the pulse of discussions throughout the last year. I've read updates here and there, so I'm simply giving my reaction to Nominet's press release. The .uk namespace won't affect my business in a drastic way - the only way it could have impacted on me (beyond doubling my registration fees) was with the domain I own that the corporate wants. Looks like I "won" on that one. I'm not basing my retirement on that, so it's not a big deal to me, but I recognise it will be a big deal to 100,000s of other folks.

The bottom line is I think five years is too long, .org.uk registrants should have been catered for to some degree, and there should have been more opportunity for competition if it's going to exist in conjunction with .co.uk. That said, I'm under no illusion that anything will change

I can't help but think that that's a little like saying, I didn't vote in the general election because my vote would not have made any difference, and now I can really moan about whoever got in. It is a method but not very productive.

 

[mdb]

I can't help but think that that's a little like saying, I didn't vote in the general election because my vote would not have made any difference, and now I can really moan about whoever got in. It is a method but not very productive.

Maybe, and that's a fair comment, but I'm a realist first As stakeholders go, I'm waaaaay down the pecking order, I invested my time in pursuits I can effect. The fact that there were so many rattled domainers, there was no way it would have progressed without their stake being taken of. I just think it's being unfairly taken care of.

As soon as .uk was announced I expected it would be roled out in the way it appears that it will be, although I did think there would be more opportunity to compete, especially for .org.uk registrants.

On the flipside to the political analogy, I voted for one thing and got something completely different. Sometimes I can't help but empathise with Russell Brand!

 

[namealot]

I can't help but think that that's a little like saying, I didn't vote in the general election because my vote would not have made any difference, and now I can really moan about whoever got in. It is a method but not very productive.

Not voting is a vote for change if enough do it there will be a revolution

 

[websaway]

Not voting is a vote for change if enough do it there will be a revolution

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[ian]

Does anyone genuiely believe a company needs five years to complete on a rebrand of their domain? A year, two years at a push I could stomach.

Yes, some absolutely will need 5 years for a rebrand; that isn't unreasonable at all. However, 5 years does still seem a very long time given that those that "can" afford a rebrand are hardly likely to um and ah over registering the domain for the sake of a few quid a few.

 

[mdb]

Nobody has presented a reliable technical way to do this for all possible services.

So is the consensus view that this was never going to be a workable option, even if it took years to negotiate?

I still maintain this would have been a more pragmatic approach to .uk if there was a chance it could have worked, and it should have been explored to nth degree.