Dr Paul Vixie, a member of the Internet Hall of Fame has called the new gTLD program a money grab and a mistake and called out ICANN for allowing it to happen saying it “indicates corruption.”
ZDNet.com, published a post about Dr. Vixie remarks from the Ruxcon information security conference in Melbourne on Sunday.
According to Wikipedia.org, Dr. Vixie is “an Internet pioneer, the author of several RFCs and some Unix software. After he left Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) in 1994, he founded Internet Software Consortium (ISC) to support BIND and other software for the Internet. The activities of ISC were assumed by a new company, Internet Systems Consortium in 2004. Although ISC operates the F root server, Vixie at one point joined the Open Root Server Network (ORSN) project and operated their L root server.”
Dr. Vixie is now the chief executive officer of Farsight Security,and a member of the Internet Hall of Fame.
ZDNet reports “”In response to an audience question about the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) decision to create some 1900 new top-level domains in this first round alone, Vixie was blunt.”
“I think it 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),”
“Vixie sees the demand for the new domains as having come 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.”
“ICANN is a 501(c)(3) non-profit public charity [under the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law], and their 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.”
You can read the entire post including what Dr. Vixie thinks of whois privacy here.
Would be interesting to see # of new gTLDS sold versus how many of them are parked/for resale/etc… to see what the true demand was. My guess is 10%.
Most domainers don’t understand the dynamics web usage in a TLD. Indeed most domainers have no idea of the level of parking/holding pages in legacy gTLDs like .COM.
Domain sales do not dictate whether a TLD is a success. A success for some registries is usage. For others, it is registration volume. However the real web usage in the gTLDs varies. Some TLDs like .COM will have web usage approaching 30%. Others, like .BIZ and .INFO have lower usage. However the new gTLDs have varying usage levels and some are doing quite well for newly launched TLDs.
I don’t agree with Dr Vixie because the new gTLDs will give the public more options and opportunity to register domain extensions that are related to their professions e.g .photography.
Isn’t this the opinion of all the dinosaurs ;)?
When someone concludes on the new TLDs as collectively a success or failure my alarm goes off. You need to look at each TLD separately. He could be right about the money grab, but talking about them as a failure is a very hasty conclusion. Judging from his background it seems that his expertise lies in DNS and security and not in branding and identity, which is what most of the new TLDs are about.
Is the nTLD program a “money grab”? Yes, of course.
Is that a bad thing? In many ways, Yes. But some commercial speculation, whether it flops or flies, can be a good thing.
Do the nTLDs offer opportunities and “actual public benefit”? Yes, in some cases.
Are they “all commercial failures”? No. And if Dr. Vixie is prepared to generalize as rashly as that, then he probably hasn’t adequately thought through his position in other respects either. For instance, he seems to think .MICROSOFT is available for anybody to hold hostage, which obviously has never been the case.
Is Dr. Vixie accurate when he talks about “corruption”, saying: “ICANN functions as a regulator, and that as a regulator it has been captured by the industry that they are regulating”? I’m inclined to say Yes.
Should ICANN wait before “creating more of these”? Probably. The public has enough to absorb already. Ironically, registries themselves may lobby against future nTLDs, since they want to get traction before facing more competition.
But I agree with Christopher. Damning all nTLDs together is a dinosaur’s opinion. They’re already here, some succeeding less than others, some unjustifiable, some worth giving a shot. Let’s make the best of it.
one of the most relevant comments, the guy thinks in ip numbers, it was the business that propelled the internet, not only investment in routers but merchant sites and commerces around the world, so yes the marketing was the drive , same thing today.
but i think it was the ‘moneygrab’ that pushed him to comment this way, he maybe right, the price must stay like the old gtld price… and icann must think about customers first
Should there be no price at which a blah blah company can buy .blahblah? Then who will buy .com domains?
Anti
https://ntldstats.com/parking/registrar
Unreliable data.
The possibility of new TLDs was expected by some. When I told a big shot lawyer friend of mine about my involvement with domains many years ago, he made a point of saying that extensions were infinitely expandable. Some of them are quite appealing in my opinion, so why not let it be a matter of choice and options just on principle. The only real concerns relate to the details of implementation.
More like a slot machine.
Many slot machine providers (registries) will get their investments back ($185 K minimum), and some players (investors, domainers) will hit jackpots — most will lose.
A roll out of another 2000, he predicts. Mass confusion. .Sex, .sexy, .sexier, .sexiest, .sexist….bank, .banks, banker, .banking, bankers, .banked.
.WTF… LOL…LMAO….
@Steve – “A roll out of another 2000, he predicts. Mass confusion. .Sex, .sexy, .sexier, .sexiest, .sexist….bank, .banks, banker, .banking, bankers, .banked.”
Therein lies a real problem. Any new releases approved by ICANN should specifically avoid consumer confusion – with .loan and .loans being the most obvious example.
The creme rises to the top. Didn’t Rick Schwartz say as much early on and isn’t it a no-brainer?
Some of the new gTLDs are clearly gold, diamonds, and silver, while others are clearly mud, hay, and straw.
There is also the issue of confusion when a good one is duplicable, such as “loan” and “loans,” as Max pointed out. But some of the “gold, diamonds, and silver” are not duplicable at all and are great.
Money grab. Yes for machine gun applicants.
Not everyone gTLD is the same though. Some of us do believe in higher purpose other than money, although as my wife reminds we do have to pay our electric bill 🙂
Colin.club
How do you define a machine gun applicant?
Hi Colin – I was wondering what’s happening with first year .club’s that are not premium, were registered for the first year, expired, and have already been deleted from the registry whois record for many days now, but if you try to register one it says it’s not available after in some cases first showing that it is. It’ll either show up as available for normal reg fee at one registrar, or over at another registrar it may show up as unavailable along with other TLDs that say something like “make offer” even though the domain has been deleted from http://whois.nic.club/whoismtld/whois/.
Is this by design? Have you decided to change the status of ones that were originally released at normal registration pricing but now one has to “make offer” to the registry? Or is it possible this is just a bug?
Hi Colin – I was wondering what’s happening with first year .club’s that are not premium, were registered for the first year, expired, and have already been deleted from the registry whois record for many days now, but if you try to register one it says it’s not available after in some cases first showing that it is. It’ll either show up as available for normal reg fee at one registrar, or over at another registrar it may show up as unavailable along with other TLDs that say something like “make offer” even though the domain has been deleted from whois (dot) nic (dot) club/whoismtld/whois/.
Is this by design? Have you decided to change the status of ones that were originally released at normal registration pricing but now one has to “make offer” to the registry? Or is it possible this is just a bug?
Goddam kids! Getoffa my lawn!
Grumpy old Uncle Vixie and his company ISC was, not long ago, helping build infrastructure for at least one major applicant. I guess he didn’t think it was a money grab then — or maybe it was OK because he was the grabber. But — surprise — that didn’t work out, because no-one can get along with him. Guess he’s changed his tune. Again. Yawn.
I’m baffled by Mr. Vixie’s comments. New gTLDs have been on the market for less than two years and some of the most anticipated ones (.app) aren’t even available yet. Despite that, registrations have already topped 8.6 million. As for demand, Mr. Vixie must have failed to notice companies like Google, Apple, Marriott, General Motors, BMW, McDonalds and Taco Bell have all utilized new domain extensions.
Based on his incorrect claim about who can register a .Microsoft domain, Mr. Vixie should’ve done some more reading on new gTLDs before recklessly criticizing them.
80% of first-tier VC backed startups fail. But like the Hollywood Studios, the firms all are shooting for a blockbuster (Facebook, Palantir, Uber, Airbnb) and they studios shoot for a franchise while building a talent line with the other greenlit film projects
We’ve heard the argument for the GTLDs — providing more choices for the consumers, and in some cases, I see how certain GTLDS can do something extra and may provide great branding opportunity — e.g., .club, .app, .cloud, and the GEOs — & for mobile GEO search: e.g, dentist.nyc, charterboat.miami
I’m biased — as are most commenters on this blog, with the old, “what’s in it for me?” —
My domain portfolio is bereft of 2 or 3 letter .com, and only a dozen one word .com (s) and lots of premium one word .me (s) and .co (s) and .org (s), so unfortunately I’ve had some negotiations for the 5 figure domains get stalled or put in limbo when the enduser(s) mention a GTLD as an alternative to the domains they originally coveted in contacting me , strictly as a negotiating tool — this has happened 3 times in the last month — and I know I’m not alone here — so of course I’m not keen on the GTLDs
However, I still do not see the value proposition of over 90% of the extensions in the GTLDs — but I admit I’m clearly biased.
Zero doubt a money grab. The new domains were never meant to be fairly sold to people that can’t afford a good .com . The new gtld owners keep all the good names and do not release them unless they get BIG money.
Also, let us not forget just about the money grab, but also extortion , like .sucks
John
A lot of the .club domains that are dropping are on snapnames.com
.club has written about it several times now
http://nic.club/septembersalesreport5649/
http://nic.club/great-nnn-club-and-keywords-in-snapnames-auctions-bid-today/
http://nic.club/club-august-registry-reserved-premium-name-snapnames-sales-report/
Thanks Michael.
We already have experience with new gTLD’s. How many are happy with their great .biz, .info, .mobi, .coop, .aero? I guess the domainers party line is that ICANN approved stupid gTLD’s first. Would not ICANN and the registries making the applications know anything about the business?
Increased use of mobile internet makes domains less important. Many facebook, tumbler and twitter users do not know the domain name of the place they contact or the email address of their friends. They use an app. Yet ICANN expanded the generic domain namespace by 2000 fold when the demand and use is decreasing.
Finally, the business has high fixed costs and almost zero marginal cost. In other words, it costs a lot to become a new gTLD registry and it costs nothing for each additional new gTLD name sale. Under those conditions prices will inevitably approach marginal cost – near zero. You will soon be able to purchase an unregistered .guru .xyz . .info etc for pennies . When the investors grow impatient and the new registries have to exist on their own they will lower prices to try to increase volume and cash flow.
Munch, your last sentence in spot-on.