Showing posts with label new gTLD registry operator. Show all posts
Showing posts with label new gTLD registry operator. Show all posts

2015-07-20

New gTLDs Domain Registry Rightside (NAME) Stock Hits Low of $6.54


In what seems to be a continuing saga of bad news for ICANN's new gTLDs (new generic top-level domains), leading new gTLD Registry operator, Rightside (NASDAQ: NAME) stock hit an intra-day low today of $6.54--see chart above--(the stock's all-time low is $6.42), finally closing at $6.80, down 0.40 (5.56%). It's been a rough ride for NAME stockholders since Rightside was spun off from Demand Media last year--the stock hit a high of $17.00 last year at the height of new gTLDs hype and mania and it's been mostly declining since then (see chart below). While there appeared to be no news affecting the stock, recent SEC filings, here and here, have raised questions. At least one commentator has speculated that the stock might become a "takeover candidate."

1 year chart of Rightside stock - NASDAQ: NAME
1 year chart of Rightside stock - NASDAQ: NAME - chart source: google.com
Note: See disclaimer at the bottom this webpage and here. Neither Domain Mondo's owner, publisher, editor, nor the author, have any interest, long or short, in Rightside (NAME) stock.

See also on Domain Mondo:

2015-05-29

Dot SUCKS: FTC Lectures ICANN On How To Protect Consumers

The FTC has responded (pdf here) to ICANN's letter (pdf) in which ICANN attempted to throw dot SUCKS Registry operator Vox Populi under the bus and pass the buck to the FTC on a problem ICANN created in its ill-conceived, misbegotten, and "horribly implemented" new gTLDs program. 

FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez, after duly noting that the FTC had recommended against the "exponential" expansion of new gTLDs (which recommendations ICANN disregarded), proceeds to lecture ("recommendations") ICANN on how ICANN can begin doing its job responsibly and protect consumers (and thereby avoid having to run to the FTC for help and advice after having acted irresponsibly and negligently in authorizing over 1000 new gTLDs into the DNS):

Excerpt (pdf) from FTC Chairwoman Ramirez Letter to ICANN May 27, 2015, re: Vox Populi and .SUCKS new gTLD
Excerpt from FTC Chairwoman Ramirez Letter to ICANN May 27, 2015, re: Vox Populi and .SUCKS new gTLD








By not answering ICANN's question of whether Vox Populi is violating any laws, the FTC has left the issue open and the onus is now back on ICANN (the FTC may have opened an investigation, it does not "comment on the existence of any pending investigations").

Good for Ms. Ramirez and FTC--well done! The FTC is not going to bail ICANN out of problems ICANN irresponsibly created. Now the issue is back in "ICANN's court." ICANN now knows it is not just a clerk "collecting the money" from new gTLD wannabe Registry operators, but has a duty to protect consumers and the public interest, and must consider, before authorizing any new gTLD, the consequences of its own actions and omissions, and the contractual requirements it imposes upon new gTLD registry operators. One thing is clear, ICANN's existing new gTLDs program and policy is clearly deficient in the FTC's view, and ICANN needs to do a lot more to protect consumers (domain name registrants, trademark holders, users of the internet). Maybe ICANN will listen to the FTC this time.

In the meantime, the sunrise for  .SUCKS closes Friday, May 29th.UPDATE: per the Registry operator--dotSucks Domain Name RegistrySunrise Phase Extended until June 19th, 2015 -- "Even though the launch of the new dotSucks domain names has received overwhelming media and market attention, we have discovered that far too many intellectual property lawyers, company executives and brand owners were unaware of the registry, the availability of its names or the Trademark Clearinghouse. This was a concern that led us over the last weeks to pay closer attention to the ability of the trademark holders to make a timely and informed decision about registering their marks or not. We have decided that the responsible move is to extend the TMCH Sunrise phase for a period of three weeks. This effectively moves the close of the TMCH Sunrise Period to June 19th at 00:01 UTC with General Availability to start June 21st at 00:01 UTC."

Also, every new gTLD Registry operator should take note: the FTC is watching you!

For background on this, see:

2014-07-05

ICANN Process for New gTLDs Dysfunctional -- from the beginning

"When a decision is taken about a possible new top-level domain, ICANN's job is to work out, in a transparent and accountable manner, whether it is really in the best interest of the world as a whole, not just of those launching the new domain." -- Tim Berners-Lee
Jean Guillon writing in CircleID asks: "What if France Had Applied for a .WINE New gTLD? ....Well… the situation would be the exact same — the applicant would be in front of three other .WINE applicants with this exact same question: how do I win the auction?... "Standard applications", "Community applications" and "Geographic applications" were created by ICANN to offer a range of procedures for applicants to decide whether "they" considered if their application was sensitive or not. ICANN has no "conseil des sages" or CFT procedure upfront to do a first check up in the new gTLD application process. So what now?"

The whole ICANN process for new gTLDs was dysfunctional from the beginning. There should have been no fees such as the $185,000 per application fee, and no auctions. There should have been a process to receive nominations for new generic top-level domains. Anyone could submit a nomination for new gTLD name extension: .web, .app, etc., with the nominating form indicating the "public interest" rationale and need for the new gTLD extension. A nominating committee to review and process the nominations would be composed of members of the global internet community, including but not limited to, domain name registrants, commercial, civil society, and government representatives (with access to experts in naming protocols, marketing, trademarks, economics, technical and other matters). The nominating committee would specifically exclude from membership registry representatives and anyone else who intended to apply to become a registry of any new gTLD or provide services to current or new gTLDs registry operators. The nominating committee would evaluate the nominations, to determine which ones ranked highest in terms of both rationale and need, in the public interest, perhaps even conducting polls for general world opinion and consensus as to preferences among the nominated new gTLDs. From that process, the nominating committee would determine and publish ranked lists of proposed new gTLDs, which would be published to the global multistakeholder community for comment, for a period of not less than thirty days. Once the comment period closed, the ranked lists and comments would be submitted to the ICANN Board (or its designee) for final determination of which new gTLDs would be added to the global domain name system.

Then, and only then, the process of soliciting and selecting the registry operator for each new gTLD would begin. That process would end with the selected registry operator executing its contract with ICANN -- ICANN acting on behalf of the global internet community. The registry operator contracts would include terms requiring operation of each new gTLD registry in the public interest for a term of years, at the lowest possible cost in annual domain name registration fees, all of which would be strictly regulated by ICANN. Financial soundness of each registry operator applicant would be one, but only one, of many criteria by which the ICANN Board or its designee would make the final registry operator selections. No fees would be paid to ICANN by the selected or applicant registry operators. ICANN would receive only the fee paid upon registration/transfer of each domain name -- ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, charges a mandatory yearly fee of $0.18 for each year of domain registration per domain name. (Registry operators would be required to pay annual assessments for operation of the internet root zone and other technical IANA functions, directly to IANA, a separate entity.)

Every current and new gTLD should be considered to be the "property" of the global internet community, regulated by ICANN, and operated by each registry, in the "public interest." ICANN was never originally intended to be an ATM or "cash machine" -- "put in your $185,000 and we will issue you your new gTLD which you can do with pretty much as you like" nor an issuer of new gTLDs to the highest bidder -- Glossary | ICANN New gTLDs: "Auction -- A method for allocating property or goods to the highest bidder." Nor were generic top-level domains ever originally intended to be licenses to make profits at the expense of the public interest -- damaging trademarks, businesses, and others in the process.

But somewhere along the line, ICANN stopped listening to people like Esther Dyson and Tim Berners-Lee, and decided to sell out the public interest for private gain and profit. In the process, ICANN has irreparably damaged the internet and its domain name system for which it was supposed to be a protector and steward.

John Poole
Domain Mondo
July 4, 2014





Domain Mondo archive