Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Why Wolfgang Puck wants his .food network

I'm sorry. Were you looking for CocaCola.com, CocaCola.food or CocaCola.beverage? Cocacola.Sydney, perhaps? CocaCola.NewYork? On the new Web you may not know where you're going anymore.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers is meeting in Sydney today to talk about, among other things,  expanding the number of generic top level domains (everything to the right of the "dot" in a Web address), going beyond .com, .biz and 19 others available today. The plan is to allow a virtually unlimited number of gTLD options, starting in the first quarter of next year.

Advocates are lining up behind the proposed change. An Australian Premier would like a .sydney gTLD. Former vice president Al Gore is promoting .eco. And this week celebrity chef Wolfgang Puck flew into ICANN's conference in Sydney, Australia to advocate or a .food gTLD. Get ready: Top level domains could soon be as common as vanity license plates.

What does that mean for the Web? Innovation, says ICANN VP Paul Levins. But it also could mean quite a bit of confusion if they take off as quickly as the idea's promoters hope.

If all goes according to plan, the world could be looking at an initial wave of 500 new top level domains as early as the first quarter of 2010, with variations based on location or any other word or text string a registry operator wants to cook up.

All of this has trademark holders concerned. They're already dealing with cybersquatters who create domains that play off their brands in the current top level domains. Adding more gTLDs to police could become overwhelming. During a five-hour meeting today members began debating recommendations put forth by the intellectual property community to keep what is already a bad problem from getting worse.

Computerworld will be running a story tomorrow about those concerns and how ICANN is responding.

Some skeptics think the new domain names are going nowhere. But if they do take off, the world where you can find a company's Web site by simply adding .com to its name may be coming to an end.

In the new world, brand owners will need to decide in which out of an unlimited number of new top level domains they want their brand to have a presence. And users may need to fire up their favorite search engine to find them.

 

What People Are Saying

Vanity TLDs

Get ready for a plethora of "DotCom is Dead" news stories.

Don't hold your breath. More than a TLD, DotCom is the default brand of the Internet and the only TLD (outside of some ccTLDs) to receive direct navigation. For a quick study in the future of 99.99% of these new gTLDs read the history of dotTravel. Killer generic TLD, millions in funding and no one cared.

In the end, public popularity and usage will decide the fate of these new TLDs and I wish them luck in getting the herd to do more than a collective yawn. If Puck gets the dotFood TLD he will launch it to great fanfare and build his own site on it, but unless 10,000 other sites are developed using dotFood (extremely unlikely), it will be remembered as just another Vanity TLD.

New TLDs

David Castello owns a portfolio of generic .com domains whose value will potentially be diminished by the introduction of new TLDs, hence his ubiquitous comments bashing new TLDs in the comment section of every blog that discusses them.

.travel failed due to overly restrictive requirements for getting a .travel address, excessively high pricing and general mismanagement. If Castello believes that 10,000 sites won't be developed on a .food, he's crazy. .tel sold 200,000 names within 2 months of launch. .biz, .info and .mobi have each sold in the millions of names. There's massive consumer (and investment) interest in new TLDs, despite what professional domain speculators, like Castello, and trademark attorneys may tell you.

RE: New TLDs

Charlotte:
You may be shocked to know that I am favor of new TLDs. The problem is that 99% of the "demand" is coming from ICANN, registrars and celebrity/politicians who see this as a get rich quick scheme. In fact, there is almost no public demand for them and that is my reason for bashing them.

On the contrary, I believe the new TLDs will enhance the value of dotCom (marketing reasons are obvious). On the other the hand, I believe they will diminish the value of the non-legacy TLDs like dotInfo, dotBiz and dotTravel.

And if you think I'm crazy in believing there won't be 10,000 names developed utilizing dotFood (and I don't mean mini-sites) I suggest you print this post and tape it to your wall. It will make for interesting reading in 2012.

Conflicts of interest?

A lot of the commentary on all sides in the domain name wars (which have been going on since the Internet caught on in the mid '90s) is from people with some kind of financial stake in either launching a new TLD or preventing them from being launched. This causes a lot of ramping up of rhetoric, and straightforward logic is left behind.

What ICANN says about that

In a press conference yesterday, ICANN's Paul Levins was asked whether existing domain owners would be compensated when new domains dilute the value of their domain holdings. Levins's answer:

"No. If there’s a food.com and someone registers food.food, no there is no compensation for that because you’re expanding the domain space. This is what it’s all about...competition," he said.

To see how many number domains registered within each of the 21 current gTLDs, see this page in the main story. Scroll down until you see the table.