New gTLD proposal
There is a lot of negative discussions about ICANN’s proposed new gTLD application process. Many are saying the process is too slow, too expensive, ICANN want to know too much about my finances, who is ICANN to judge if my business plan is sustainable etc.
Without writing a commentary as long as the guidelines are (aprox 200 A4 pages or a trip from Cairo to NZ worth of reading) in essence i think it is well thought out proposal for the first draft with the exception of Intellectual Property rights and copyright issues.
The procedures prevents millions of new gTLD’s being created overnight and then disappear as quickly as they were created. Similar to how 2nd levels in .com are created and randomly disappear over night.
There appear to be many micro communities crying fowl over the large expenses and the tough criteria. I will use the principles of the latest email i read for this example.
Country A has several official languages, one of which is dying out. Group A want to create a gTLD to revive the language called .A . Then ten other countries in exactly the same position all do the same then we have 11 new gTLD’s to promote 11 different countries dying languages, all of which are being promoted in isolation from each other. Why not a global gTLD .linguist or similar?.
The example above appears to be common to all the groups complaining about the proposed policy weather they are commercial entities, geographic, community, social or culture groups.
As opposed to getting frustrated these groups should be networking on a global scale finding partnerships with others who are in the same situation. No one wants to see the Internet have so many TLD’s that we do not know what we are looking for.
The other obvious issue in my opinion is that a new gTLD is not necessary for many of the projects of which would be better served utilising portals and social networks.