VeriSign’s Plans for “.Com IDNs” Become Clearer - IDN Forums

alpha · #1 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 10:12 PM

Interesting blog post over at DNW.. not sure if Andrew is quoting another article or whether he interviewed Verisign himself.

Quote:

“Nothing is in concrete yet,” said Chuck Gomes, Vice President of Policy and Compliance for VeriSign Information Services. “But I think it’s a pretty well agreed-to plan.”

Quote:

“We want the .com name to be a unique experience for .com regardless of what script you do it in,” said Gomes.

Quote:

The same goes for .net.

Quote:

“I can say that the business unit is considering applying for ’several’ IDN versions of .com in some of the scripts that are available.”

I read that as not all languages. Assuming Verisign has to pay like all the other gTLD applications, then you can assume only the mainstream languages will be applied for.
Question is, how is that determined, population or current reg levels in com, or GDP.. or something else. Interesting times ahead IMO

Link

squirrel · #2 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 10:35 PM

Interesting stuff with respect to landing the IDN TLD contract and losing the ASCII one. Perhaps Verisign has an interest in delaying IDNCOM and IDNNET... ?

alpha · #3 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squirrel

Interesting stuff with respect to landing the IDN TLD contract and losing the ASCII one. Perhaps Verisign has an interest in delaying IDNCOM and IDNNET... ?

actually I was thinking the opposite.. surely landing various IDN TLD contracts strengthens their case for retaining the ASCII one; because a split would be real messy. The ASCII one is up in 2012?

IDNCowboy · #4 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha

actually I was thinking the opposite.. surely landing various IDN TLD contracts strengthens their case for retaining the ASCII one; because a split would be real messy. The ASCII one is up in 2012?

The fact that they need to charge us more is bs.. They are already raising fees in a few months. I guess the crackerjack CEOs of both Verisign and ICANN need new yachts.

alpha · #5 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IDNCowboy

The fact that they need to charge us more is bs.. They are already raising fees in a few months. I guess the crackerjack CEOs of both Verisign and ICANN need new yachts.

who cares. Unless you have domains not worth 2x regfee

555 · #6 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 10:45 PM

It doesn't matter to the registrant. Even if Verisign manages 55%, Afilias manages 12% and Neustar the additional 33% all the variants of my names will resolve where i want them to resolve.
Also, Can anyone explain how this may happen?

sarcle · #7 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squirrel

Interesting stuff with respect to landing the IDN TLD contract and losing the ASCII one. Perhaps Verisign has an interest in delaying IDNCOM and IDNNET... ?

Verisign has no interest in delaying IDNCOM as it doesn't help their bottom line. IDNCOM will be tied to AsciiCOM. They will get two registration fees for the price of one. Hence "MO money MO money MO money!" for them.

Thanks Alpha.

555 · #8 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 11:28 PM

Comment from David J Castello:

If I read this correctly, it sounds like a trademark nightmare. In other words, Hotels.com won’t automatically get first ctack at Hotels.com in all non-Latin characters?

blastfromthepast · #9 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 11:29 PM

This is bad news for Runic IDN.IDN.

IDNCowboy · #10 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 555

Comment from David J Castello:

If I read this correctly, it sounds like a trademark nightmare. In other words, Hotels.com won’t automatically get first ctack at Hotels.com in all non-Latin characters?

why would they want hotels . native language anyway :P

squirrel · #11 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 555

Comment from David J Castello:

If I read this correctly, it sounds like a trademark nightmare. In other words, Hotels.com won’t automatically get first ctack at Hotels.com in all non-Latin characters?

uh ?

alpha · #12 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IDNCowboy

why would they want hotels . native language anyway :P

yeah, I'm sure I remember a few years back reading comments from guys like him that IDN was junk anyway.

I could be mistaken of course, my memory isn't what it used to be.

IDNCowboy · #13 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha

yeah, I'm sure I remember a few years back reading comments from guys like him that IDN was junk anyway.

I could be mistaken of course, my memory isn't what it used to be.

These same people are going to go after hotels.com in multiple languages claiming they own them.

alpha · #14 (**permalink**) 26th February 2010, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IDNCowboy

These same people are going to go after hotels.com in multiple languages claiming they own them.

Then they are confused.

I'll borrow the example I think that thefabfive used last time we had this same discussion raised by Castello on a different blog on the same topic last year.

Does the owner of Car.com own Voiture.com (French for Car)
Does the owner of Car.com have a right to Voiture.com

Why would it be any different when dealing with other languages that don't use ascii

It's BS. and smells of desperation.

IDNCowboy · #15 (**permalink**) 27th February 2010, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha

Then they are confused.

I'll borrow the example I think that thefabfive used last time we had this same discussion raised by Castello on a different blog on the same topic last year.

Does the owner of Car.com own Voiture.com (French for Car)
Does the owner of Car.com have a right to Voiture.com

Why would it be any different when dealing with other languages that don't use ascii

It's BS. and smells of desperation.

He does not seem educated in the subject matter unfortunately.... With all of the conventions (Traffic, DomainFest) he goes to you would think he would know more about it. I thought these conventions were attended by some of the brightest in the industry.

jose · #16 (**permalink**) 27th February 2010, 12:01 AM

Best part: "As of right now, that looks like a good bet." when referring to our portfolios

Worts part: "It creates some complications". IN ICANN LANGUAGE THIS TRANSLATES IN MANY, MANY DRAFTS, WORKSHOPS, COMMISSIONS, DISCUSSION GROUPS, PAPERS, HELL and BACK... YEARS, YEARS, YEARS... oh God....

jose · #17 (**permalink**) 27th February 2010, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha

Then they are confused.

I'll borrow the example I think that thefabfive used last time we had this same discussion raised by Castello on a different blog on the same topic last year.

Does the owner of Car.com own Voiture.com (French for Car)
Does the owner of Car.com have a right to Voiture.com

Why would it be any different when dealing with other languages that don't use ascii

It's BS. and smells of desperation.

How about this: グーグル ?

I've heard some have "car.com" trademarks.

Rubber Duck · #18 (**permalink**) 27th February 2010, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha

who cares. Unless you have domains not worth 2x regfee

Exactly. Once this takes off, we will care about as much as those paying $35 dollars at Netsol.

Rubber Duck · #19 (**permalink**) 27th February 2010, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 555

Comment from David J Castello:

If I read this correctly, it sounds like a trademark nightmare. In other words, Hotels.com won’t automatically get first ctack at Hotels.com in all non-Latin characters?

This guy needs to stop inhaling through a straw.

Rubber Duck · #20 (**permalink**) 27th February 2010, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha

yeah, I'm sure I remember a few years back reading comments from guys like him that IDN was junk anyway.

I could be mistaken of course, my memory isn't what it used to be.

No but they will be on record out there somewhere, which would just about scupper any attempts at WIPO they might aspire to.