The BBC reports that ICANN are going to vote on Thursday whether or not to open up top level domains, allowing more. This would means many more suffixes than the 281 top level ones (e.g. .uk, .org, .biz, .com, .int) we currently have.
I dislike this move. Why? It would remove the nice way domains are categorised, make domains even more open to intellectual property use and to be honest and create far too many suffixes for it to be convenient to use.
The beauty of domain names to me is what they were intended to represent. .com was supposed to represent a commercial entity, .org was supposed to represent a non-profit, .co.uk to represent a commercial British entity, .int to represent an international organisation and .su to represent the Soviet Union. A key problem with domain names is that ICANN is American-dominated, which messes up this nice system. .com is informally accepted as the US suffix whilst .gov and .mil are officially American; which is surely not ‘right’ due to the international nature of the Internet.
As time went on, domain name categorisation has grown even more polluted. Is there really a need for .name, .aero or .museum? The only reason obscure domain categories like these are introduced is surely to make money. Such obscure suffixes aren’t user friendly; which is easier to remember: www.co-operative.coop or www.co-operative.com?
Some registries polluted the system even more, by advertising their domain for something which wasn’t its original purpose. A famous example of this is .tv, which the Tuvuluan registry designated to be used for television shows. Other examples of ‘domain hacks’ which pollute this system are .at, .fm and .me.
I see no purpose in opening it up. It will confuse people more and make the system more susceptible to abuse (if people register domains for the same reasons they register .info). ICANN describe opening it up as ‘the process of opening up new real estate’ and I guess it is, in a way. In a Superman Returns fashion, they are terraforming to form this real estate. By providing this real estate, there will be more trademark disputes, domain squatting but I guess there will be more money for registries and registrars, but domains themselves will be less valuable.
Even though I agree on the “US is trying to monopolize the internet”, you have to accept applying some branding into domains might just be the twist missing in the online menu. If not Del.icio.us things would only be deliciously.com(ercial) but somehow not so tasty places.
cheers
Hallaathrad may have hit the nail on the head there with his comment regarding incorporating branding into domains. Over the past 6 months, many of the projects assigned to me concerning identity and branding, have required that the domain suffix be included in the brand itself.
Furthermore, I’d like to point out that the domain market is rotting. Between domain squatters and predictive registration (that is, companies or individuals buying multiple domains similar to their own and routing them all back to their primary domain) leaves little in the way of availability when it comes to opportunities for domains.
What is left is no less pollution than additional domain suffixes. The web is awash now with “Web 2.0″ sites with convoluted names like Flickr, Ma.gnolia, del.icio.us and other “creative” title that are just as difficult, if not more so, to remember.
In summary, both sides have points to be considered. The fact of the matter, however, is that it seems that this is happening whether any of us want it to or not. Time to embrace the future.