New gTLD .WEB: Afilias vs ICANN, Verisign $VRSN & Nu Dot Co?

UPDATE Nov-Dec 2018: Afilias vs ICANN IRP -- News Review | Verisign $VRSN & New gTLD .WEB, Afilias vs ICANN.

UPDATE May 23, 2018: Request 20180423-1, Arif Ali on behalf of Afilias Domains No. 3 Ltd. | ICANN.org:

• Afilias Request (23 April 2018) [PDF, 639 KB]

• ICANN Response (23 May 2018) [PDF, 126 KB]

UPDATE May 11, 2018: Letter of 1 May 2018  from Arif Ali [Afilias] to Jeffrey LeVee [ICANN]  [Published by ICANN 10 May 2018] re: .WEB Contention Set, embed below:

UPDATE May 8, 2018: Letter of 28  Apr 2018 from Jeffrey LeVee [ICANN] to Arif Ali [Afilias] Published 7 May 2018] re: new gTLD .WEB--embed below--".WEB contention set is on hold":

UPDATE April 23, 2018:

Excerpt from 16 Apr 2018 Letter to ICANN from Counsel for Afilias (highlighting added) (full embed below)

Afilias drops "bomb" on ICANN Board--16 April 2018 Letter from Arif Ali (Afilias) to ICANN Board (pdf) embed below (excerpt above) [Published by ICANN on 23 April 2018]:

See also 23 April 2018 Letter from Arif Ali to ICANN Board [published by ICANN 24 April 2018] Dechert LLP ICANN's Response to DIDP Request No. 20180223-1.

UPDATE March 27, 2018--ICANN's response dated March 24, 2018 (pdf), to Afilias, embedded below, following this excerpt (pp. 11-12):

"On 1 February 2017, DOJ issued a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) to ICANN in connection with DOJ’s investigation of Verisign’s proposed acquisition of NDC’s contractual rights to operate the .WEB gTLD. ICANN provided DOJ with information responsive to the CID. With regard to Item 9(a), the vast majority of the documents provided to DOJ are publicly available materials. Attachment A provides links to the publicly available documents that ICANN organization provided to DOJ in response to the CID. With respect to the non-public materials provided to DOJ, such materials are categorized as follows and are subject to various Nondisclosure Conditions:

"• Confidential data reports, subject to the following Nondisclosure Conditions: o Information provided by or to a government or international organization, or any form of recitation of such information, in the expectation that the information will be kept confidential and/or would or likely would materially prejudice ICANN's relationship with that party. o Information provided to ICANN by a party that, if disclosed, would or would be likely to materially prejudice the commercial interests, financial interests, and/or competitive position of such party or was provided to ICANN pursuant to a nondisclosure agreement or nondisclosure provision within an agreement. o Confidential business information and/or internal policies and procedures. o Trade secrets and commercial and financial information not publicly disclosed by ICANN."

Full response from ICANN embedded below:

Original post March 7, 2018:
ICANN's new gTLD .WEB -- It's not over till it's over: 

New gTLD .WEB Applicant (and second-highest bidder) Afilias (domain: afilias.info) Requests Update on ICANN’s Investigation of .WEB Contention Set and Further, Requests Documents under ICANN’s Documentary Information Disclosure Policy:

23 February 2018 Letter from Arif Ali of Dechert LLP on behalf of .WEB applicant Afilias to ICANN Board of Directors & ICANN President and CEO Göran Marby (pdf)--Request for Update on ICANN's Investigation of .WEB Contention Set and Request for Documents under ICANN's Documentary Information Disclosure Policy--embed further below--excerpt:

"Therefore, pursuant to ICANN’s transparency obligations, we respectfully request that ICANN provide an update on the status of ICANN’s investigation of the .WEB contention set, including: (1) the steps (if any) taken by ICANN to disqualify NDC’s [Nu Dot Co LLC] bid on the basis that NDC violated the rules applicable to its application; and (2) the steps (if any) taken by ICANN to assess competition issues arising out of delegation of .WEB to Verisign.

"We further request that ICANN take no action in regards to .WEB until Afilias can review and respond to the documents provided as a result of the below DIDP request; and that ICANN confirm that it has not, and will not, enter into a registry agreement for .WEB with NDC until, to the extent Afilias seeks review of any decisions relating to .WEB through ICANN’s accountability mechanisms, such mechanisms are completed. We nonetheless emphasize that Afilias reserves all of its rights to pursue any and all rights or remedies available to it in any forum against ICANN, NDC, or Verisign in connection with the delegation of the .WEB gTLD." (emphasis added)

See also on Domain Mondo: 

• News Review | New gTLD .WEB, ICANN & Verisign, What's Next? January 14, 2018

• News Review | Reply Brief: Ruby Glen vs ICANN (new gTLD .WEB) January 7, 2018.

UPDATE: A look back at the .WEB auction results, July 27, 2016--Afilias was the lone bidder against Nu Dot Co (financed by Verisign) above the $57,500,000 - $71,900,00 round:

*Also note that Charleston Road Registry Inc. is Google's affiliate registry operator.

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo
Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Scott Bradner: A Look Back at the History of IANA & ICANN (video)

NANOG 68 Keynote IANA Transition:

Video above published Oct 18, 2016:

Keynote: IANA Transition

Meeting: NANOG 68, 2016-10-17 10:30am - 11:30am
Presenter / Speaker: Scott Bradner, Harvard University, retired

Abstract: "Scott Bradner will discuss the history of Internet Governance leading up to the transition of oversight of the IANA function from NTIA to the internet's multistakeholder community."

Topics discussed include Jon Postel, competition in the TLDs (top-level domains) space, ICANN's expansion of new gTLDs and what Jon Postel would think about what ICANN has done, and become, since Jon's vision for the organization in 1998 when it was formed. (Hint: .COM, .NET, and .ORG domains will become more valuable.)

Scott Bradner was involved in the design, operation and use of data networks at Harvard University since the early days of the ARPANET. He was involved in the design of the original Harvard data networks, the Longwood Medical Area network (LMAnet) and New England Academic and Research Network (NEARnet). He was founding chair of the technical committees of LMAnet, NEARnet and the Corporation for Research and Enterprise Network (CoREN). Bradner retired from Harvard University in 2016 after 50 years working there in the areas of computer programming, system management, networking, IT security and identity management. He still does some patent related consulting. 

"... Scott Bradner is of the view that ICANN is seen as process bound, and I find it hard to disagree. He noted that the original ByLaws of the organisation had 9,000 words, and over time this has expanded to 36,000 words. Scott appears to hold the view that ICANN blew any goodwill Jon [Postel] had personally gathered from the start, and has maintained a largely secretive and capricious perception. Again, I cannot disagree with this opinion .... we are now in a new phase and one that has its elements of continued change and potential instability. The degree of public sector commitment is variable, and the pressures on ICANN are completely and totally unpredictable. It's likely that at best, all we can say is that this will probably not stay the same as it is today ..."--Geoff Huston, Author & Chief Scientist at APNIC, circleid.com (emphasis added)

Note: NANOG 68 | North American Network Operators Group | nanog.org: NANOG 68 took place on October 17-19, 2016, at Dallas, TX.

Presentation slides (pdf) embedded below:

Transcript (pdf) auto-generated by YouTube.com (unedited) embedded below:

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo
Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

ICANN Finally Publishes Verisign .COM Extension Agreement & RZMA

With the U.S. heading into a 3-4 day holiday break--Fourth of July a/k/a Independence Day--ICANN published Thursday, June 30, 2016, for review and comment, First Amendment to the .COM Registry Agreement (extension), as well as the new Root Zone Maintainer Agreement (RZMA). Verisign has been maintainer of the global internet root zone under an agreement with the U.S. government (NTIA) but that will be replaced by the new RZMA between Verisign (NASDAQ: VRSN), and ICANN, a California corporation which will be an unregulated global monopoly after September 30, 2016, in accordance with the Obama administration's IANA transition plans announced March 14, 2014.

Verisign is the registry operator of gTLD (generic top-level domain) .COM, one of the internet's original gTLDs (originally administered by the U.S. Department of Defense), and today the market dominant leader and largest TLD in the world. Verisign is also operator of two of the global internet's thirteen root name servers, and provides registry services for other TLDs (top-level domains), including the second-largest gTLD, .NET, and the U.S. government's .GOV. Under the terms of the new RZMA, Verisign, which was previously unpaid for its RZM services, will now be paid $25,000 per month (see Schedule 3, p. 36 of 47 in the RZMA embed below).

Both the .COM extension and RZMA agreement, as published June 30th by ICANN, are embedded below. Verisign is limited on what it can charge for .COM registrations and renewals by the terms of Amendment 32 (pdf) to the Cooperative Agreement between Verisign and NTIA, which expires November 30, 2018, unless extended (and NTIA has not indicated whether it will be extended and on what terms):

"The Maximum Price charged by VeriSign for registration or renewal of a .com domain name during the term of the .com Registry Agreement approved hereby shall not exceed US $7.85; provided, however, that VeriSign shall, be entitled to increases in the Maximum Price in accordance with Section 7.3( d)(ii) of the .com'Registry Agreement; provided further that VeriSign shall not exercise such right unless the Department provides prior written approval that the exercise of such right will serve the public interest, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld."

Under the current ICANN .COM Registry Agreement with Verisign (Section 7.3 Pricing for Domain Name Registrations and Registry Services):

"(d) Maximum Price. The Maximum Price for Registry Services subject to this Section 7.3 shall be as follows: (i) from the Effective Date through 30 November 2018, US $7.85; (ii) Registry Operator shall be entitled to increase the Maximum Price during the term of the Agreement due to the imposition of any new Consensus Policy or documented extraordinary expense resulting from an attack or threat of attack on the Security or Stability of the DNS, not to exceed the smaller of the preceding year's Maximum Price or the highest price charged during the preceding year, multiplied by 1.07." 

The .COM extension agreement (embed below) in substance only extends the .COM Registry Agreement through November 30, 2024. However it does contain this language:

2. Future Amendments. The parties shall cooperate and negotiate in good faith to amend the terms of the Agreement (a) by the second anniversary of the Effective Date, [2018] to preserve and enhance the security and stability of the Internet or the TLD, and (b) as may be necessary for consistency with changes to, or the termination or expiration of, the Cooperative Agreement between Registry Operator and the Department of Commerce. (emphasis added)

The term of the RZMA (embed below) is eight years, which means it will also end in 2024.

Additional Information:
• Public Comment on Proposed Amendment to .COM Registry Agreement | ICANN.org: Close Date 12 Aug 2016 23:59 UTC - Comments forum (there is already one objecting comment filed).
• Root Zone Management Transition Update | ICANN.org: blog post by Akram Atallah, ICANN Global Domains Division President, June 28, 2016.

First Amendment to .COM Registry Agreement (pdf) embed below (highlighting added):


Root Zone Maintainer Service Agreement [RZMA] (pdf) embed below (highlighting added):


feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo
Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

ICANN and Dot AFRICA: Dismissed Party ZACR Files Notice of Appeal

UPDATE July 18: AFRICA Appeals Consolidated--"the parties’ joint motion (Docket Entry No. 5) to consolidate Nos.16-55693 and 16-55894 and to amend the briefing schedule is granted. The opening brief in No. 16-55693 has been filed. The opening brief in No. 16-55694 is due July 22, 2016. The answering brief is due August 19, 2016. The optional reply brief is due September 9, 2016"--Order embedded below:

UPDATE June 29: ICANN filed its opening brief:

The sad saga of ICANN's bungling of the application process for new gTLD (new generic top-level domain) .AFRICA has added another chapter as dismissed party ZA Central Registry (ZACR) has filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, from Orders entered by the Hon. R. Gary Klausner, U.S. District Court Judge, granting DotConnectAfrica Trust's (DCA) Motion for Preliminary Injunction (enjoining ICANN from delegating .AFRICA) and denying ICANN's motion for reconsideration of the Preliminary Injunction Order. The unusual twist in this case is that the District Court had dismissed ZACR as a Defendant "thereby extinguishing ZACR's role a[s] party to the action" (see  Order of June 20 included as Exhibit 2 of the notice of appeal embedded in full below), prior to denying ICANN's reconsideration motion.

ICANN's appellant brief in its interlocutory appeal is due June 29, 2016, and the U.S. District Court has assigned the case to a 10-12 day jury trial beginning February 28, 2017.

UPDATE June 28, 2016: ICANN has amended its notice of appeal and also appeals the U.S. District Court’s Order entered on June 20, 2016 (ECF No. 113), attached to ICANN's Amended Notice of Appeal (last embed below), which denied ICANN's motion for reconsideration of the Court's Order granting the preliminary injunction.

See also on Domain Mondo:

• New gTLD AFRICA Litigation: Defendant ZACR Dismissed as a Party 16 June 2016
• News Review [May 15]: IANA, ICANN, New gTLDs .AFRICA, .AMAZON, .BLOG: ".AFRICA UPDATE: "ICANN has appealed the U.S. District Court's Order granting a Preliminary Injunction in the DCA (DotConnectAfrica) Trust vs ICANN and ZACR litigation over new gTLD.AFRICA ..."
• News Review [Apr 17]: dotAFRICA, Public Interest, Judge Holds ICANN Accountable
• Will ICANN File An Interlocutory Appeal in DCA Trust gTLD AFRICA Case? 13 April 2016
• New gTLD AFRICA: DotConnectAfrica Trust vs ICANN, End of the Line? 21 March 2016
• US Federal Court Enjoins ICANN From Delegating New gTLD dot AFRICA 5 March 2016
• DCA Trust IRP Decision: ICANN Failed the Global Internet Community 12 July 2015

ZACR's Notice of Appeal with Exhibits 1 & 2 (highlighting added):


ICANN's Amended Notice of Appeal with Exhibits (highlighting added):


feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo
Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

US Senator Ted Cruz: Delay IANA Transition, Save Internet Freedom

UPDATE June 8, 2016: U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wisconsin) today introduced the Protecting Internet Freedom Act (press release embedded below):


--Original post below--
According to TheHill.com, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz has been circulating legislation to colleagues with background information (embedded below). The legislation is titled the Protecting Internet Freedom Act (embedded below), and Cruz is reportedly calling it "our last chance to save internet freedom." The bill also requires the Obama administration to certify that it has secured "sole ownership" of the top-level domain names (TLDs) used by the U.S. government and the U.S. military, which end in .GOV and .MIL.

The Hill says it is unclear whether the Cruz legislation will go anywhere on Capitol Hill since a similar attempt last year by Cruz failed in a Senate Commerce Committee vote. This year other U.S. Senators, including Mike Lee (UT), James Lankford (OK) and Marco Rubio (FL), have called for NTIA to delay the IANA stewardship transition. In the U.S. House of Representatives, there is a pending policy rider to a major spending bill that blocks funds from being used to complete the IANA stewardship transition. For more information see DomainMondo.com links further below.

Background information:

Protecting Internet Freedom Act:


See also on Domain Mondo:

• News Review [29 May 2016]: ​IANA Transition, What If The World Gives Up On ICANN?​
• IANA Transition, What's Next, Years of Litigation in U.S. Federal Courts?
• Enhancing ICANN Accountability, Much Work Left for Work Stream 2
• IANA & ICANN: Cruz, Lankford & Lee Letter to Pritzker & Strickling

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo
Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

News Review: IANA Implementation, GNSO Open House, .COM Q1 2016

Domain Mondo's review of the past week and look ahead: 
• The most important ICANN webpage right now is here--that is the page with links and information about the ongoing IANA Transition implementation work, including this graphic:

See also Friday's CCWG-Accountability Co-Chair Update: ICANN, IANA Transition, Implementation, WS2, CCWG-Accountability | Domain Mondo.

• Take note of ICANN GNSO Working Group Newcomer Open House Session | 5 April at 20:00 UTC - RSVP via this form--remote participation details will be sent on 4 April 2016. Learn how to effectively participate in ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO)--"these informal sessions provide an ideal opportunity for participants to ask questions about the GNSO Policy Development Process and the specifics of taking part in a Working Group"--Reading Materials for review in connection with the session: Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws; PDP Manual (pdf); PDP Overview; Consensus Policy; GNSO Working Group Guidelines Summary (pdf); GNSO Working Group Guidelines (pdf).

Here's the GNSO Project List (pdf)  (as of March 4, 2016):

See also: http://gnso.icann.org/en/

• The DotConnectAFRICA Trust vs ICANN hearing in U.S. District Court, Los Angeles, on Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction to stop ICANN from further proceeding with delegation of the new gTLD .AFRICA is scheduled for April 4. In the meantime, ICANN has moved to dismiss Plaintiff DotConnectAFRICA Trust's case, which motion is noticed for April 25, 2016. Updates will be posted on Domain Mondo at New gTLD AFRICA: DotConnectAfrica Trust vs ICANN, End of the Line?.

• With the end of Q1 2016, this past week, earnings season has begun. Domain Mondo will provide coverage of a select group of technology and domain name industry companies: Apple, Facebook, Alibaba, Amazon.com, Alphabet (Google), Yahoo, Neustar, Twitter, Verisign, Web.com, Rightside, GoDaddy. The schedule for each earnings release, once announced, will be posted on Domain Mondo's Stock Links page.

• Speaking of end of the first quarter of 2016, Verisign, registry operator of .COM and .NET gTLDs, posted this information on Friday:

.COM & .NET DOMAIN NAME BASE AS OF 04/01/2016

.com 126,596,055

.net 15,858,054

Total 142,454,109

The active zone as of 04/01/2016 contains 125,622,442 .com domain names and 15,654,074 .net domains totaling 141,276,516 domain names.

Largest Top 20 gTLDs at scale, .COM far left (8.8.2014)

.COM, still by far the largest Top-level Domain in the world (see chart at left), as of  December 31, 2015, had a reported Domain Name Base of 123,998,138, so "net adds" for Q1 2016 were 2.6 million domain names for .COM alone.

Which reminds me that not only are the Chinese still actively registering .COM domain names, but notwithstanding the misinformation spread by ICANN & new gTLD operators, you can still find and register good exact match dot COM domain names--just this past Friday an old friend contacted me for advice concerning a new business he was starting in a highly-regulated industry. He included in his email the name he had in mind for the business. I immediately checked, and the exact match .COM domain name was available for registration, as well as 3 alternative .COM domain names I also suggested he immediately register before proceeding further.

This past week's five most popular posts on Domain Mondo (# of pageviews Sun-Sat):

1. News Review [March 27]: France Blasts IANA Proposal, Berkman to Assess ICANN
2. ISIS and the Internet: Networks, IP Addresses, Domains (videos)
3. Ben Horowitz on the Lessons He Learned From Intel's Andy Grove (video)
4. Is This The Time For Americans To Invest In Cuba? (videos)
5. Domain Names, New gTLDs, Present & Future Perspectives, SSIG Video

If you haven't seen the video in #5 above, I highly recommend it, particularly the presentations given by Philipp Grabensee, Chairman of the Board of Directors, Afilias, and Keith Drazek, Vice President of Public Policy & Government Relations, Verisign.

Have a great week!

-- John Poole, Editor, Domain Mondo


Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

US Federal Court Enjoins ICANN From Delegating New gTLD dot AFRICA

UPDATE June 16, 2016: New gTLD AFRICA Litigation: Defendant ZACR Dismissed as a Party.

UPDATE March 21, 2015 see on DomainMondo.com: New gTLD AFRICA: DotConnectAfrica Trust vs ICANN, End of the Line?. Further updates following the April 4, 2016, hearing will be posted there.

A Federal Judge in Los Angeles has rained on Fadi's parade in Marrakech, Morroco:

The United States District Court, Central District of California, in the case of: DOTCONNECTAFRICA TRUST v. INTERNET CORP. FOR ASSIGNED NAMES
AND NUMBERS, Case No. CV 16-00862 RGK (JCx), has issued an Order enjoining ICANN from delegating the new gTLD .AFRICA:

"On March 2, 2016, DotConnectAfrica Trust (“Plaintiff”) filed this Ex Parte Application for TRO. By way of this application, Plaintiff seeks an order enjoining Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“Defendant” or “ICANN”) from issuing the .Africa gTLD until the Court decides Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, scheduled for hearing on April 4, 2016.

"A district court may issue a TRO where the moving party demonstrates the need for immediate relief, and establishes that relief is warranted under one of the following circumstances. Under the traditional criteria, a plaintiff must demonstrate “(1) a strong likelihood of success on the merits, (2) the possibility of irreparable injury to plaintiff if preliminary relief is not granted, (3) a balance of hardships favoring the plaintiff, and (4) advancement of the public interest (in certain cases).” Guzman v. Shewry, 552 F.3d 941, 948 (9th Cir. 2009). Alternatively, “a court may grant the injunction if the plaintiff demonstrates “serious questions going to the merits” and a “balance of hardships that tip sharply toward” plaintiff, provided “plaintiff also show that there is a likelihood of irreparable injury and that the inunction is in the public interest.” Alliance for Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, (632 F.3d 1127, 1131-1132 (9th Cir. 2011). 

"Upon review of the parties’ arguments, the Court finds serious questions going to the merits. Plaintiff has demonstrated that once the tGLD [gTLD] is issued, it will be unable to obtain those rights elsewhere. Moreover, the injury it will suffer cannot be compensated through monetary damages. In opposition, Defendant states in conclusory fashion only that the African governments and the ICANN community will suffer prejudice if the delegation of the gTLD is delayed.

"Based on the foregoing, the Court grants Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application for TRO. Defendant is enjoined from issuing the .Africa tGLD until the Court decides Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, scheduled for hearing on April 4, 2016." (emphasis added)

Also note ICANN's report of this today on its website: ICANN Temporarily Stopped from Delegating .AFRICA Pending Federal Court Hearing on 4 April 2016 and

ICANN Board Resolution March 3, 2016: "Resolved (2016.03.03.01), the Board authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to proceed with the delegation of .AFRICA to be operated by ZACR pursuant to the Registry Agreement that ZACR has entered with ICANN."

For more background on this:

• DCA Trust IRP Decision: ICANN Failed the Global Internet Community
• IRP Panel in DCA Trust Case Overrules ICANN Bylaws Provision
• ICANN dot AFRICA IRP: WHO Redacted WHAT In the Final Declaration?

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Verisign LIVE Webcast, Credit Suisse Conference, 1 Dec 2015, Replay

UPDATE: Verisign (VRSN) Presents at Credit Suisse Technology, Media and Telecom Conference (Transcript) | Seeking Alpha--excerpt--James Bidzos, Verisign President and Chief Executive Officer:

"Again for a lot of you who are new maybe just a very, very brief overview of the contracts that we have particularly com and net those two domains renew every six years .net renewed in 2011 and will renew again in 2017 .com renewed in 2012 and will renew again in [November] 2018. Both of those contracts have a presumptive right of renewal, which means as long as there is no breach without a cure than those contracts will be renewed and that presumptive renewal provision has been successfully executed and tested in 2011 and in 2012. As to the pricing question with .net, we are allowed to increase prices 10% per year, with .com currently the price is fixed at $7.85 per domain and just a brief history of how that came about wide is, I think it’s early to speculate about what may or may not happen, but at least I can give you some historical facts leading up to today. Back in 2006, the Department of Justice found that .com was found to have market power and so that market power was constrained first by reasonable price of $6 per domain and then some limited ability to increase prices. At that time in 2006, there were only a couple of dozen or less generic TLDs in the marketplace and then of course the country code ccTLDs were also available. During the 2012 renewal by then the price through the increase as it come up to $7.85 and the contract was renewed in 2012. And again in this case the government found that $7.85 was reasonable price although they did remove the automatic price increases, they did not conduct another market study. And so the next renewal for .com comes up in 2018. Now the difference between 2006 and 2012 as compared to 2018, there are couple of interesting things to note about that, the 22 roughly generic TLDs that existed at that time have now grown to over 700 that are available. So the amount of choice available to consumers to choose a TLD test going up dramatically. In addition to that these [new gTLDs] TLDs are selling at an average price roughly three times the prices that .com is selling … of course it’s too early to say what will happen in 2018.” (emphasis added)

See also on Domain Mondo: VeriSign .COM Registry Agreement, What Happens After November 2018?

VeriSign, Inc. (“Verisign”), the TLD (top-level domain) Registry operator for .COM and .NET, announced in a Form 8-K filing that Jim Bidzos, Executive Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, and George Kilguss III, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, would speak at the Credit Suisse Technology, Media and Telecom Conference in Scottsdale, Arizona on Tuesday, December 1, 2015, at 1:30 p.m. (MST) which is 3:30 p.m. EST (US). During the discussion, recent company performance and business initiatives will be highlighted.

Listen to the discussion via live audio webcast at https://investor.verisign.com: Verisign Presentation at Credit Suisse Technology, Media and Telecom Conference, Dec 1, 2015, 1:30 PM MT which is 3:30 PM ET (US) - Listen to webcast

A replay of the webcast will also be available at https://investor.verisign.com after the event for a limited period of time. 

In connection with this speaking engagement, Verisign provided the following information about the recent increased volume of .COM and .NET domain name registrations during the fourth quarter of 2015:

"As noted on Verisign’s third quarter earnings call on October 22, 2015, there was a higher volume of gross additions, during the third quarter, in international markets, particularly Asia. Verisign discloses the updated domain name base for the .com and .net registries at least daily on its website, https://www.verisign.com/zone. This publicly available information reflects that this increased volume of domain name registrations has continued in October 2015 and in November 2015. As of November 22, 2015 Verisign’s domain name base totaled 139.3 million, up 4.1 million from September 30, 2015. While there continues to be demand for domain names globally, the recent increased volume for Verisign’s top level domains, as well as top level domains of other registries, during the fourth quarter is coming largely through registrars in China. In the past, Verisign has discussed many factors that affect the demand for domain names, including, but not limited to economic, social, and regulatory conditions, Internet adoption, Internet penetration, and increasing e-commerce. In addition to these factors affecting demand, Verisign is also evaluating additional potential factors unique to China that may also be responsible for the recent increased volume of new registrations in China. In no particular order, these potential factors, or combination of factors, could include, but may not be limited to, government initiatives in China to develop their online economy such as ‘Internet Plus*;’ registry and registrar regulatory requirements; cultural influences such as the popularity of numeric domain names; increasing competition amongst Chinese registrars; potential increases in domain name investment activity; and recent capital markets volatility and access to capital in China. Verisign cannot predict if or how long this increased pace of gross additions will continue and we cannot at this time predict what the renewal rate for these domain names will be. Verisign has noted in the past that renewal rates for domain names registered in emerging markets, such as China, have historically been lower than those registered in more developed markets. Verisign will continue to evaluate these and potentially other factors and expects to have additional information related to the domain name base on Verisign’s fourth quarter and full year 2015 earnings call." (source of above: Verisign Form 8-K) (emphasis added)

*Speaking at the March 5, 2015, opening meeting of the National People's Congress, Premier Li Keqiang spoke of the "Internet Plus" concept in his 2015 Government Work Report. According to Premier Li's report, "Internet Plus" entails integration of mobile Internet, cloud computing, big data and Internet of Things with modern manufacturing, fostering new industries and business development, including e-commerce, industrial Internet and Internet finance. (Source: usito.org)(emphasis added).

Verisign:

• Principal domain name: verisign.com
• Stock Exchange: Symbol - NASDAQ: VRSN
• Investor relations: investor.verisign.com

See also on Domain Mondo: VeriSign, $VRSN, Q3 2015 Earnings Call, 22 October 2015

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

The World's Most Valuable Startups All Use dot COM Domain Names

Source: Statista

Domain names of the world's 10 most valuable private companies backed by venture capital:

• uber.com

• xiaomi.com redirects to mi.com

• airbnb.com

• palantir.com

• snapchat.com

• xiaojukeji.com (Didi Kuaidi)

• flipkart.com

• spacex.com

• pinterest.com

• dropbox.com

Why do ALL of the world's most valuable startups use dot COM domain names and not another TLD (top-level domain)?

The problem with not having the .com of your name is that it signals weakness. Unless you're so big that your reputation precedes you, a marginal domain suggests you're a marginal company. Whereas (as Stripe shows) having x.com signals strength even if it has no relation to what you do. Even good founders can be in denial about this ... 100% of the top 20 YC companies by valuation have the .com of their name. 94% of the top 50 do." - Paul Graham, VC and co-founder of the Y Combinator seed capital firm

Caveat Emptor!

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Housing Bubble Like New gTLDs Mania? The Big Short Trailer (video)

"The Big Short Trailer (2015) - When four outsiders saw what the big banks, media and government refused to, the global collapse of the economy, they had an idea: The Big Short. Their bold investment leads them into the dark underbelly of modern banking where they must question everyone and everything. Based on the true story and best-selling book by Michael Lewis (The Blind Side, Moneyball), and directed by Adam Mckay (Anchorman, Step Brothers) The Big Short stars Christian Bale, Steve Carell, Ryan Gosling and Brad Pitt. In US theaters this Christmas.

This looks like a great movie, and also reminds Domain Mondo of the same mindset or mania of those within ICANN, its directors, officers, staff and stakeholder groups, and applicants, for new gTLDs, flooding the market with hundreds of mostly unwanted, unneeded new gTLDs (new generic top-level domains), only to discover that the expected consumer demand and predicted financial success missing--e.g., remember ICANN's estimate that there would be 33 million new gTLD registrations in FY15 (July2014-June2015)--reality: less than 5 million! And then we have all the new gTLD hucksters and suckers who have ended up with new gTLD domain names they couldn't sell or, in some cases, even give away--a good example is the otherwise successful investor Frank Schilling--

"Marketing for .SEXY and .TATTOO begin March 8th [2014].  At $19.99, anything good .SEXY will be gone in a year." --Frank Schilling  27 Feb 2014 (emphasis added)

How many "good" .sexy domains do you think are available? "I think there are probably 200,000 big generics and creative hax. When those are gone, others will be taking FirstLast.sexy."--Frank Schilling 27 Feb 2014 (emphasis added)

Reality check: more than a year later, as of September 29, 2015, total registrations for new gTLD .sexy total only 21,290 (source: namestat.org) and reportedly Frank paid for thousands of those .SEXY domain name registrations himself through his North Sound Names, otherwise the registrations total would be even worse!

"...  I think new gTLD operators like Uniregistry were too close to their product in 2014. We have been living and breathing new gTLDs since 2011, so the official launch in 2014 was the end of a 3 year relay for us, and we were surprised that the consuming public and other registrars were not standing there eagerly to take the baton and run forward with the same zeal that it took us to get that baton to them."--Frank Schilling (January, 2015)(emphasis added)

Key phrase: "We were surprised."

"I do think that Donuts’ approach of having a large portfolio of 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)

Sound like the kind of domain name extension or TLD (top-level domain) you want to build your business on?--"Oh, the registry operator of our domain name operates out of his bedroom"--what were they (ICANN on down) thinking? Was it really just about greed? 

See also on Domain Mondo: New gTLD Domains, the Walking Dead and Dying, ICANN FY15 Results July 2, 2015

Caveat Emptor!


Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Dot COM Domain Name Registry Verisign Shares Hit 52-week High

Verisign Inc. (Nasdaq: VRSN) 12 month chart above

Dot COM Top-Level Domain (TLD) Name Registry VeriSign Inc.'s stock (NASDAQ:VRSN) closed Thursday $71.03, UP $0.49 (0.69%). According to Marketwatch.com, the stock has a 52 week low of $52.10, and a 52 week high, which it hit today, of $71.27. Overall, the stock has surged this year (see 12 month VRSN chart above). The shares are now trading well above their 50-day moving average and their 200-day moving average. The Company reported Q2 2015 earnings on July 23rd. Below are excerpts with links to articles on analyst reports concerning the company and its stock:

Can VeriSign, Inc. (NASDAQ:VRSN) Keep Up with Analyst Expectations? (July 29, 2015): "Brokerage firm analysts covering the stock are estimating that the stock will reach $63.75 on a short term basis. This is the consensus price target based on the 2 polled by Zacks Research. The highest estimate stands at 70 while the lowest target is $57.5."

Verisign Rating Increased to Buy at Zacks (VRSN) July 29, 2015: "VRSN has been the subject of several other reports. Topeka Capital Markets lifted their price objective on Verisign from $72.00 to $90.00 and gave the company a “buy” rating in a research note on Monday. Cowen and Company set a $61.00 target price on Verisign and gave the stock a “hold” rating in a research note on Tuesday, June 2nd. Two analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, two have given a hold rating and two have assigned a buy rating to the stock. The company has an average rating of “Hold” and a consensus price target of $65.17."

At this point, Verisign stock has blown past most stock analysts' "estimates."

More info: VRSN Analyst Estimates - VeriSign Inc. Analyst Estimates - MarketWatch

Principal domain name: verisigninc.com
Verisign Investor Relations: investor.verisign.com

Below is the Twitter feed on Verisign Inc. stock:
Tweets about $VRSN

Follow @DomainMondo

What Does That July 29th Deadline Mean For .brand TLD Applicants?

Akram Atallah, ICANN Global Domains Division President
(source: ICANNphotos - License CC BY-SA 2.0)

Why is this man smiling?

Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: Google's handling of new top level domains: "Q: Will a .BRAND TLD be given any more or less weight than a .com? A: No. Those TLDs will be treated the same as other gTLDs. They will require the same geotargeting settings and configuration, and they won’t have more weight or influence in the way we crawl, index, or rank URLs."

"The idea that a brand needs its own TLD must be the biggest con ever perpetrated by domain consultants." -- Ken Schafer

What does that July 29th deadline mean for .brand TLD applicants? In short, it means the deadline to execute a Registry Agreement with ICANN for almost two hundred "brand" names, with more money than good sense, having already wasted a lot of money applying for their very own spanking new "brand" gTLD that probably will "fail to work as expected on the internet," or "break stuff," and has no, nada, SEO advantage when it comes to Google search. Where can one go to get a refund? Well, you can probably forget about getting any refund from that "domain name consultant" or registry services rep a/k/a "trusted advisor" a/k/a snake oil salesman who talked your lamebrained CTO or CIO or other staff member(s) into "applying" for that mostly useless, worthless top-level domain, that hardly any major "brand" company uses as its principal domain name, even today. It was all just another "predatory shakedown scheme" hatched by the Global Domains Division of ICANN together with those ICANN "stakeholders" who stood to profit from your stupidity and gullibility. Note that Mark Zuckerberg, Chairman and CEO of Facebook (along with many others in Silicon Valley) refused to be "suckered"--there is no dot FACEBOOK--and Mark is probably laughing at all of you reluctant .brand TLD applicants facing the July 29th deadline to sign a Registry Agreement with ICANN, which will obligate your company to pay thousands and thousands of dollars per year indefinitely into the future, instead of just doing what Zuckerberg and most "brand" registrants do, which is pay about $10 per year for the best top-level domain (TLD) god ever created--the global "gold standard in domain names"--a dot COM domain name.

But heck, you've got plenty of money to throw away, go ahead, sign the Registry Agreement, and tell Akram that Domain Mondo says hello!


Follow @DomainMondo

Google Just Killed The Last Remaining Rationale for New gTLD Domains

Google just disrupted ICANN's new gTLD domains--it's called "innovation" [Update below] 

"... today we’re updating the algorithms that display URLs in the search results to better reflect the names of websites, using the real-world name of the site instead of the domain name, and the URL structure of the sites in a breadcrumbs-like format..."--Google, April 16, 2015 (emphasis added) 

The bad news for ICANN's new gTLDs just keeps piling up. While the domaining-domainer blogosphere was all lit up last week about Google's new search change now rolling out in mobile--the domain name extension (TLD) of the destination URL will not show in the search results--they missed the most important effect of the change: Google just killed the last remaining rationale for new gTLD domain names. Countless promoters, hustlers, speculators and "consultants," have invested their time and treasure in ICANN's new gTLDs based on the premise of the significance and importance of the "right of the dot" word for "branding" purposes! Oops! Never mind--Google is just serving up the website "title" without the TLD ("right of the dot word").

UPDATE: Many are still confused about "what just happened?"--it's called innovation, disintermediation--Google just disintermediated the new gTLDs. Impact on .COM, and ccTLDs? Minimal. They already have dominant "branding" and market share in their respective markets and are the "presumed TLD"--e.g., in the U.S. and global online market, it is a well-known fact that consumers and other users of the Internet will just type the name of the business or website and add .COM when doing direct navigation in a browser or application.

But you believed those new gTLD hucksters when they told you that Google would "ensure" the success of the new gTLDs? That new gTLDs would produce superior SEO results? FALSE. That first year new gTLD registrations would total 33 million or more? FALSE!

Let's add all the above to the other ways that new gTLD domain names have now reportedly failed, including, failing all the most important factors in choosing a domain name extension (top-level domain or "TLD"):

1. New gTLD domain names FAIL to work across the internet and "break stuff" (a/k/a the universal acceptance problem which ICANN has known about since at least 2003);

2. New gTLDs compromise the stability and security of the Internet (a corollary to the above).

3. New gTLD domain names lack pricing predictability--why invest time and money building a website on a new gTLD domain name only to be subject to the possibility of extortionate future price increases for annual registration renewals? Thanks to ICANN, new gTLD registry operators have sole discretion and control for new gTLD domain name pricing, including future increases for registration and renewal fees. A trusted, reliable registry operator with a history, practice, policy and/or requirement of pricing predictability for their TLDs, is a necessary requirement before most prudent registrants will even begin to invest their own hard-earned money in building a website on that TLD! But ICANN, its GNSO, and their "well-paid expert" never thought about that! And these are some of the same people, who, despite the pathetic registration numbers of new gTLDs, are still expecting everyone to start building major websites on these defective, untrustworthy new gTLDS (new generic top-level domains).

[ Note to ICANN: All the above is an example of what happens when you do not have a Registrant Stakeholder Group in ICANN. ]

Add all the above together and there is no doubt that the King was right--ICANN's new gTLD domain names, as a class, are a #FAIL. No wonder new gTLD Registry operators are getting increasingly desperate--giving domain names away for free or selling for only 49 cents each!--which only "trashes" the TLD further, attracting cybersquatters, cyber criminals, and other bad actors.

And to top it all off, Google just delivered the coup de grâce!

Caveat Emptor!


Follow @DomainMondo

Addition of TLD .COM Can Make Trademark Distinctive says French Court

Addition of TLD .COM can make trademark distinctive says French Court--

"In B v Pressimmo On Line (October 14 2014), the Paris Court of Appeal has ruled that, while the term ‘se loger’ (meaning ‘to find somewhere to live’) on its own was descriptive in relation to real estate, it was distinctive when combined with the top-level domain (TLD) ‘.com’. The claimant was a group of companies (Pressimmo On Line and Se Loger.com)..." read more at: worldtrademarkreview.com (subscription)

Note the difference between descriptive and distinctive marks: Trademark distinctiveness - Wikipedia: "Trademark distinctiveness is an important concept in the law governing trademarks and service marks. A trademark may be eligible for registration, or registrable, if it performs the essential trademark function, and has distinctive character. Registrability can be understood as a continuum, with "inherently distinctive" marks at one end, "generic" and "descriptive" marks with no distinctive character at the other end, and "suggestive" and "arbitrary" marks lying between these two points. "Descriptive" marks must acquire distinctiveness through secondary meaning - consumers have come to recognize the mark as a source indicator - to be protectable. "Generic" terms are used to refer to the product or service itself and cannot be used as trademarks...."

See also the search results here and the following:

Showing Common-Law Trademark Rights in a UDRP: "... the UDRP is only designed to be used by a complainant who owns the rights to a trademark that has been infringed upon by a domain name. Typically, trademark rights are proven in UDRP complaints by showing the copy of a registration certificate in some country. Merely having a pending trademark application is not enough. However, it may be possible to meet this proof by showing evidence of common-law trademark rights, which arise from actual use rather than from a formal registration...."

Follow @DomainMondo

The Three Tiers of Top-Level Domains (TLDs)

So thanks to ICANN and its new gTLDs program, we now have three tiers of Domain Names (TLD domain name extensions) in the domain name ecosystem:

First Tier Top-Level Domain Names: .COM domain names
Second Tier Top-Level Domains: .NET, .ORG, ccTLDs and other open, unrestricted gTLDs
Third Tier Top-Level Domains: everything that's left--restricted, branded, closed, etc.--TLDs

A check with RegistrarStats and a review of Domain Name Sales reports confirms the above--you can't argue with the market consensus as to valuations and sales!

And so, unfortunately, we have to endure for several months more, the now boring, mundane release of countless additional new gTLDs still to come (yawn), second tier and third tier. Here's an example of a new third tier TLD:

The 'Land Rush' Has Begun: Register Your .nyc Domain | Gale A. Brewer - Manhattan Borough President: "... All registrants are required to have a physical street address in New York City (with no P.O. boxes permitted)... By October 7, if nobody else has requested the same address, it's yours. If there are multiple requests for the same address, an auction will be held to determine who will own it. A successful domain name registered during Land rush will cost $30 plus $20 for each year it registers the name... We don't want the .nyc portal to become a corporate playground; it should enable local organizations and businesses to have a presence online. The bodega, the corner pizza place, the 24-hour locksmith, the family-run shoe repair service -- that's what this is about..." --great, every corner pizza joint in New York City needs its own .nyc domain name (even if it costs more than double what you would pay to register a dot COM domain name)--such a deal!

Follow @DomainMondo
Seguir a @DomainMondo

Tim Berners-Lee on ICANN, new gTLDs, public interest

We Need a Magna Carta for the Internet | Tim Berners-Lee: "....For me, that means that 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. It also means that ICANN's use of the funds should be spent in a beneficent way...."

What a novel idea: whether a new gTLD is really in the best interest of the world as a whole. Too bad ICANN was in such a rush to satisfy the greed and gluttony of the new gTLD hucksters, that it completely forgot about the public interest!

Dot Sucks!


 Follow @DomainMondo
Seguir a @DomainMondo