IP: A Closer Look at the New Domain Names

[David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

I am still in the country and will be till 1025 pdt tonight. I agree with
Donna but am glad I will be off line for a while :-) Dave




From: hoffman () colette ogsm Vanderbilt Edu
Subject: A Closer Look at the New Domain Names
To: farber () cis upenn edu
Dave:


Are you still in the country?  If so, can you forward this to the list?  See
you in Palo Alto later this summer!


Finally!  Someone has decided to admit that the IAHC is a good example of
boys behaving badly, but there's a more important story here than just
wishing these folks would grow up.


Frankly, I've become increasingly dismayed that no one has yet to mention
how utterly stupidthe proposed new Internet domain name plan is.


It's a disaster waiting to happen from a BUSINESS perspective.


The new top level domains


.store
.firm
.web
.arts
.rec
.nom
.info


were generated by organizations with little apparent business (or common)
sense.


No offense, but These guys might have technical expertise, but
apparently understand little about consumer behavior, the nature of emerging
and existing markets and industry structure, or how businesses function in
the real (or virtual!) world.


The IAHC - International Ad Hoc Committee - representing a number of Net
standards organizations (e.g. Internet Society, Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority, Internet Architecture Board, International Telecommunications
Union,
World Intellectual Property Organization, and International Trademark
Association), was responsible for drafting this ridiculous plan.  Where did
they come up with these names?


What do these top-level domain names MEAN?  The opportunities for consumer
and
business confusion are enormous.  If this group had any grasp at all of the
value of a brand name, they would not have selected top-level domains with
such
ambiguous and overlapping meanings.


The naming issue has received some attention in the media, but only in the
context of
the political squabbling between IAHC, the EU and Network Solutions over who
ought to be in charge.


But this is a red herring!  The real issue is what a disaster the adoption
of
these seven new top-level domains will be for commercial efforts on the
Internet.


While we may need new top-level domain names to handle the enormous
growth of commercial sites on the Internet, my feeling is that the folks
with the commercial interests need to get involved in this before it's too
late.


Imagine you're a Web start-up: which top-level domain do you choose?  Under
the
proposed system, you'll have to select MORE THAN ONE to make sure you have
all
bases covered.  This is grossy inefficient and just plain stupid.  And
you're likely to get sued
anyway...


The proposed system is rigid, lacking in precision, ambiguous,
confusing, and subject to trademark violations.  It reflects
a remarkable naivete about the nature of commerce, online or otherwise.


If these new top-level domains are adopted they have the potential to create
enormousproblems for the developing commercial infrastructure.  
Imagine the extra burden on search engines as consumers try to figure out
how to find anything (hard enough already in our simple world of .com for
commercial!).


What's the difference between XYZ.financial.info and XYZ.financial.firm? 
(.info
is for "information services" and .firm is for "businesses or firms")
Should I
name my start-up fun.startup.rec or fun.startup.store (I sell goods, but
they're
entertainment-oriented and .rec is for "recreational or entertainment" sites
and
"store is for "businesses offering goods").  Will consumers know how to find
me?
Especially if I can't afford a big advertising campaign right away?  What if
I
have an established physical business?  What's the best top-level domain for
my
virtual offerings?


It's important that we put aside petty concerns and start t tackle these
kinds of importantstrategic and  consumer behavior concerns.  We need to
begin with a discussion of the *commercial* benefits and limitations
inherent in a system being proposed for commercial names.  For example, I
haven't seen the IAHC (or anyone else) discuss what these new names MEAN and
or lay out how a reasonable person might go about selecting one of these new
domains.  


The discussion to date has been inadequate and juvenile.  It's time for the
Net and its denizens to grow up.


Best,


DLH
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~
Professor Donna L. Hoffman
hoffman () colette ogsm vanderbilt edu
Owen Graduate School of Management          615-343-6904 voice
Vanderbilt University                       615-343-7177 fax
Nashville, TN 37203                         129.59.210.109 CU-SeeMe


Project 2000:      http://www2000.ogsm.vanderbilt.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








******Remember  19 June in San Fran******


Look at http://www.eff.org/fillmore