- "I think it [ICANN's new gTLDs] is a money grab. My own view is that ICANN functions as a regulator, and that as a regulator it has been captured by the industry that they are regulating. I think that there was no end-user demand whatsoever for more so-called DNS extensions, [or] global generic top-level domains (gTLDs).”
- The demand for the new domains came from "the people who have the budget to send a lot of people to every ICANN meeting, and participate in every debate", that is, the domain name registrars who simply want more names to sell, so they can make more money. But these new domains don't seem to be working. "They're gradually rolling out, and they are all commercial failures."
- "I'm sure that there will be another 2,000 of them sold, because $185,000 to pay the application fee for each one [is] chump change to the companies who want to make money doing this."
- Creating the new domains goes against ICANN's purpose--"ICANN is a 501(c)(3) non-profit public charity [under the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law], and their [ICANN's] job is to serve the public, not to serve the companies... I think that until they can come up with an actual public benefit reason they should be creating more of these, they've got no cause to act;" "there should be no price at which you can buy .microsoft, but there is, and that's a mistake. That indicates corruption, as far as I'm concerned."
ICANN 54: The same tired refrain was heard yet again at another ICANN meeting, from the failing new gTLDs lobbyists, if only slightly more desperate this time--
"Good afternoon, Christa Taylor from dot TBA in Canada. I just have a couple comments for consideration for the Board and community. I understand the use of auction funds is open for comments and I would ask that they be used to strategically and financially benefit the new gtld ecosphere. Registration revenues have not reached the tipping point and implications could be severe if they're [the ICANN auction proceeds] utilized in some other manner..." (emphasis added) (ICANN 54 Public Forum, October 22, 2015)
Translated: Many new gTLDs (new generic top-level domains) are failing, and we (the new gTLDs lobby) want ICANN (and the global internet community) to financially support us and 'save us' from the consequences of our failing to do proper 'due diligence' before applying for unwanted, unneeded new gTLD(s), for which nobody, including ICANN, guaranteed 'success,' and now we want YOU to give us YOUR money.
Have these people (new gTLDs lobbyists) no shame?
Actually, Ms. Taylor apparently was not listening--it was announced at the beginning of the Forum that this was not the time nor place to make comments about issues for which there are, or would be, ongoing ICANN processes open for public comments--see: New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper Open for Public Comments until 8 Nov 2015 23:59 UTC.
Unsurprisingly, Ms. Taylor's 'comment' was appropriately 'dealt' with (i.e., brushed off):
Wolfgang Kleinwachter: ... Cherine will take the first part of your question.
[ICANN Board Member] Cherine Chalaby: Regarding the -- what to do with the auction money, I think this is -- we are committed that this is going to be a community decision, and the Board is not going to direct where this money is going to be. So you got to give your input. I think the GNSO is going to you know, undertake the work there and make a recommendation on this issue. And they use the community input as a whole in that. So that's an important thing. Thank you very much.
We have heard this same refrain from the new gTLDs lobby, over and over again, at other ICANN Public Forums--see: ICANN is NOT a new gTLDs Marketing Agency: ICANN 53 Review, Part 3 (June 29, 2015).
Anyone wanting more background on this should read:
Or just listen to a new gTLDs registry operator, Frank Schilling (Uniregistry):
"I do think that Donuts’ approach of having a large portfolio [hundreds] of [new gTLDs] names is the right model. There is not enough cash flow to sustain a business otherwise. We at Uniregistry are just big enough but I expect that some registries will soon be people operating out of their bedrooms. Many of the new names just don’t work."--Frank Schilling (June, 2015)(emphasis added)
See also on Domain Mondo:
- Verisign, ICANN, Internet Root Zone, Risk Factors to the Root Domain 26 Oct 2015
- Why Did ICANN Become a Member of Trademark Lobbyist Group INTA? 15 Oct 2015