iEstates.com

Guest contributor Zak Muscovitch is a domain name lawyer, based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He has been practicing domain name law for over ten years and is now running for the election for a seat on the CIRA Board of Directors. Go to http://www.DNattorney.com and http://zak-for-cira.ca/ for more information.

The Canadian Internet Registration Authority (“CIRA”) operates Canada’s .CA domain name registry in the “public interest”. Where does this authority come from and what is the “public interest”? During the current 2010 election for CIRA’s Board of Directors, these questions should be raised and debated. CIRA has an important role to fill as the operational manager of the registry, but has an equally important role to fill in terms of governing the .CA space in the public interest.

Read the full article after the jump.

When CIRA was incorporated as a Canadian federal corporation without share capital (otherwise known as a not-for-profit corporation) on December 30, 1998, there was no mention of “the public interest” in its formal objectives as filed with Industry Canada. CIRA’s formal objectives were:

a) to act as the registry for the .CA Internet domain;

b) to provide professional registry services comparable to other major national and international Internet registries;

c) to develop and carry out any other Internet-related registration activities in Canada; and

d) to do all such other things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above objects.

In 2006, CIRA made apparently minor revisions to their filed objectives with Industry Canada, so that c), above, now read;

“to develop, carry out and/or support any other Internet-related activities in Canada”.

The change is small, but noteworthy. One can see that “support” of “any internet-related activities” was added, ostensibly expanding CIRA’a objectives to include broader involvement and support in anything Internet related, not just registration related. This is the foundation for CIRA’s mandate to be actively involved in supporting Internet related activities in Canada. But there was still no mention of the “public interest” in CIRA’s formal objectives. So where does the “public interest” come into play for CIRA?

On March 11, 1999, Michael Binder, Assistant Deputy Minister Spectrum, Information Technologies and Telecommunications (Industry Canada), wrote a letter to Rob Hall, then Chairman of the Board of CIRA, to thank John Demco for his management of the registry for the previous ten years, to congratulate CIRA on its incorporation, and to “recognize CIRA as the administrator of the .ca domain space” (the “Binder Letter”).

The Binder Letter essentially confirmed that the Government of Canada was permitting CIRA to run the registry and that CIRA was expected to adopt certain principles in its operation. The term “public interest” however, did not appear in this letter. Rather, the term “public resource” was used in the following manner:

“The .CA domain space is a key public resource, helping to promote the development of electronic commerce in Canada and important to our country’s future social and economic development”.

The term “public resource” was used within a context that suggested that .CA domain names had two important roles to play, which were both in the public interest;

a) economic development through the development of Internet businesses for wealth creation; and

b) social development so Canada could fulfill its aspirations as a society.

Accordingly, even though the term, “public interest” was not expressly used by Industry Canada in confirming CIRA’s mandate, it was nonetheless made clear CIRA was to operate the .CA registry with this combination of public interest priorities in mind; namely economic and social development.

The first express use of the term “public interest” as it relates to CIRA, appeared shortly thereafter. On October 10, 2000, Industry Canada confirmed to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”), that CIRA was formally being designated as Canada’s administrator of the .CA registry. In this letter, Industry Canada expressly confirmed that CIRA was to operate in the “public interest”:

This agreement provides that the Government of Canada will designate CIRA to be the new administrator of the .ca and that CIRA will manage the .ca in accordance with principles set by the Government of Canada in the March 11, 1999 letter referred to above and any additional principles that are in the public interest and reasonable. [emphasis added]

The “agreement” referred to by Industry Canada, above, was the “Umbrella Agreement” wherein UBC (the former .CA administrator under the leadership of John Demco), the Government of Canada, and CIRA, agreed on the transition to administration of the .CA registry by CIRA. The Umbrella Agreement expressly made reference to both CIRA being mandated to operate the .CA registry as a “public resource” and in the “public interest”.

The Umbrella Agreement expressly confirmed that the “public interest”, as originally expressed in the Binder Letter, involved both a concern for economic and social development:

“the parties are of the view that the .ca domain space should be developed as a key public resource for social and economic development for all Canadians”. [emphasis added]

The Umbrella Agreement further confirmed that in accordance with Industry Canada’s mandate to CIRA of October 10, 1999:

“CIRA was incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation with the intention of managing the .ca domain space in the public interest”. [emphasis added]

The next appearance of the express use of the term, “public interest”, as it relates to CIRA, appeared in the “Principles for the Delegation and Administration of Country Code Top Level Domain Names”, Presented by ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee on February 23, 2000 (the “GAC Principles”). This document’s objective was to suggest principles that will assist in the development of best practice for the delegation and administration of ccTLDs (country code top-level domain names, such as .CA).

Section 5.1 of the GAC Principles stated:

The relevant government or public authority ultimately represents the interests of the people of the country or territory for which the ccTLD has been delegated. Accordingly, the role of the relevant government or public authority is to ensure that the ccTLD is being administered in the public interest, whilst taking into consideration issues of public policy and relevant law and regulation. [emphasis added]

The GAC Principles also laid out some broader principles that emphasized that while a ccTLD manager such as CIRA has a duty to serve the public interest of its local community, it also has a duty to the global Internet community:

The Internet has evolved from a tool reserved for computer and networking research, to a global medium for commerce, education, and communication. The new realities of the Internet, including its increased importance as a vehicle for national economic growth, and the expanding and more diverse nature of the Internet community necessitated evolution in the traditional means of managing and administering Internet technical functions.

The manager of a ccTLD performs a public service on behalf of the relevant local community and as such the designated manager has a duty to serve this community. The designated manager also has a responsibility to the global Internet community. By ‘global Internet community’ we do not mean any specific legal or international entity, but rather we interpret the term to refer to all of those who are affected by, now or in the future, the operation of the relevant TLD, because such operation may impinge on more than one jurisdiction and affect the interests of individuals and entities from both within the relevant country or territory and elsewhere.

Although this was an ICANN document and an ICANN set of principles, CIRA formally and legally adopted certain of the GAC Principles on November 30, 2000. Then Chair of the CIRA Board, Maureen Cubberley, wrote to Michael Roberts, President of ICANN, and stated that “CIRA supports the framework of the GAC principles as a sound basis for the ongoing relationships concerning the delegation and administration of ccTLDs” and confirmed CIRA’s commitment to administering the .CA registry as a “public resource” in accordance with the Binder Letter.

Accordingly, CIRA’s mandate to operate the .CA registry both as a public resource for economic and social development, and in the public interest, has a well established foundation and history. The question then turns to the myriad of possible applications of these important but very broad principles and to what degree CIRA has followed them.

On October 7, 2009, renowned Internet Law expert, Professor Michael Geist, expressed his concern for what he felt was a “Disappearing Public Interest Mandate”. He noted that “CIRA has not done enough to advance the potential social side of the mandate despite [is] and leaving it to its directors to question whether the social contributions found in leading country-code domains around the world are even part of CIRA’s mandate.” This followed Professor Geist’s previous Blog posting and Toronto Star article wherein he questioned “an unmistakable shift toward prioritizing commercial gain over the public interest”. As examples of this shift, Professor Geist noted a “decision to effectively terminate plans to create an external, public interest body to address “excess” funds”, a decision to “expand CIRA’s registry services to new generic top-level domains”, and “killed a planned submission to the CRTC’s net neutrality hearings”.

In response to Professor Geist, CIRA Chief Executive Office, Byron Holland, disputed Professor Geist’s observations while confirming that “the dot-ca domain is essential to social and economic development within Canada, and we take our mandate of effective stewardship of this key public resource very seriously”. Mr. Holland stated that CIRA “[had] not abandoned plans to actively pursue other public-interest elements of [CIRA’s] mandate”, but noted “[CIRA has] been steadily building [a] reserve but [CIRA] is not quite there yet”.

Mr. Holland also noted that, “CIRA is pursuing additional sources of revenue from other potential registry services to ensure that we have the funds necessary to live up to our stated operational obligations and increased activity in the public interest side of the Canadian domain space.”

Accordingly, what can be seen here, is the struggle to follow both tracks that the Government of Canada mandated CIRA to follow, namely social and economic development, in the public interest. Professor Geist has correctly pointed out that social development in the public interest, is a key component of Canada’s mandate to CIRA, and yet there is scarce evidence that CIRA has embarked on what could be considered an appropriately ambitious course. Professor Geist cites the fact that  “other countries have used their domain name authorities to fund research, engage in public policy, or even grant every citizen the right to a domain name at no cost”, yet Canada appears to have not pursued any of these social development opportunities in any substantial manner.

On the other hand, Mr. Holland correctly points out that in order to fulfill Canada’s mandate to CIRA to engage in social development, CIRA must raise funds from economic development opportunities, including managing CIRA with “reliance on market forces and private sector leadership”, as required in the Binder letter. CIRA cannot of course make any substantial headway into social development projects without adequate resources, and therefore the exploration of revenue generation opportunities is required and closely tied to CIRA’s mandate of social development.

Nevertheless, an election is now underway for the Board of Directors of CIRA, and it is imperative, indeed it is in the public interest, for all concerned to vigorously debate how CIRA can better follow the two tracks of social and economic development mandated by the Government of Canada by seeking and applying all appropriate sources of revenue.

CIRA is in an enviable position of being able to realize reoccurring revenues from its monopoly over .CA registrations. It gets $8.50 year after year, for each .CA registered. CIRA currently has nearly 1.5 million .CA’s registered. By promoting the .CA registry and by increasing access to .CA domain names in a manner consistent with CIRA’s mandate, CIRA could potentially reap millions more on an annual basis that it could, and should, apply to ambitious social and economic development projects. The nature of such projects should be debated and raised in the election with all ideas put on the table, from free domain names for all Canadians, to a special fund for Canadian Internet entrepreneurs.

As someone standing for election for the single public seat available this year on the CIRA Board, I intend to continue to raise these issues in public and would like for others to do the same.

Zak Muscovitch is a Canadian domain name lawyer and his CIRA election web site is zak-for-cira.ca.

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions

Here is what maybe a huge step for Domains to become a real world asset in the wider investment community.

In a press release today, a company called the The Domain Developers Fund says they will  officially launch on August 1.

“The DDF offers institutional and private investors equity investments in Internet Domain Names.”

“Its the first fund to invest in domain names only.”

The release from Grand Cayman

“Recent million-dollar domain deals and stories such as the ones around sex.com, slots.com, vodka.com have curbed interest from the public, media and institutional investors in domains as an investment and asset of high interest. With the introduction of an investment fund dedicated only to domains, the market takes another step in establishing domains as a real-life asset.”

“The domain business is still at an embryonic stage and I see more and more institutional investors are moving into this segment.”

“When domain names had been introduced 25 years ago only few could imagine into what the domain business would grow into.

“The fund started in the summer of 2008 when 3 long time domainers from Austria, Hong Kong and Germany joined forces and merged their domain portfolios. Starting in March 2009, the trio offered friends and family to invest into their domain-business to be able to purchase more valuable domains.”

“Due to the great performance many more investors wanted to move in. In its first year the fund had a performance of 135% and close to 100 investors but was still just a managed account based in Austria.”

“Early 2010, as even more investors wanted to move in, the trio decided to incorporate the DDF as a mutual and administered fund in the Cayman Islands and to formally incorporate the business. Michael Marcovici, who is the fund´s founder and 1^st director expects more competition in the next years: “the domain business is still at an embryonic stage and I see more and more institutional investors are moving into this segment.”

The Domain Developers Fund holds a portfolio of in various segments of the domain market, in the .com space as well as in some of the popular ccTLDs of Germany, India, UK, China, Switzerland, Colombia and many others. On the funds website www.ddf.lu the Fund´s Management is especially bullish for ccTLDs: “search and services are becoming increasingly local and domains just go along, we see the biggest growth in ccTLDs (country code domains) in the years to come.”

“The fund uses various monetizing techniques to generate returns of up to 50% of ROI/year and domain. The fund is managed by Michael Marcovici and Alberto Sanz de Lama, both well experienced in online markets and long time domainers. The board of advisers consists of Stefan Piech, Marko Rodzinek and Philip Schindler.”

“The DDF is the first of its kind and is an opportunity for investors who want to be a part of the domain market. The funds mangers Marcovici and Sanz expect returns of 20 to 40% per year.”"

Certainly interesting and something many domainer have been talking about trying to do for years.

RickLatona.com, auction for one letter domain names starts tonight at 6pmEST.

All domains are priced with a starting bid of $2K and although they may not be the greatest extensions in the world, its an opportunity to own a rare one letter domain for just a couple of grand.

The auction starts closing on August 19th at 6Pm EST.

C.cr
E.af
F.af
F.ai
G.af
G.ai
H.af
J.af
K.cr
L.af
L.cr
L.kg
M.af
M.cr
N.ai
N.cr
O.af
O.ai
P.af
Q.af
Q.ai
Q.cr
Q.kg
R.kg
T.kg
U.af
U.ai
U.cr
V.af
V.ai
V.cr
W.af
W.kg
Y.af
Z.af
Z.ai

According to BusinessWire.com the domain name www.onlinecasino.dk just sold for $580,000 to a Gaming company based in Malta.

.dk is the country code of Denmark.

You can also read more about this sale here.

Before tomorrow’s General Availability Launch of the .CO ccTLD domain registrations, today is the final day to place pre-orders. The local Colombian based registrar Mi.Com.Co has launched a site offering the top 300 places in its registration queue. Prices start at $300 and are lowered the later the spot in the queue is. Currently the site shows 50 registrations pending approval.

Domain Name Wire has published a handy guide listing a number of registrars where .CO domains can be registered.

Disclaimer: The .CO registry is one of our advertisers along with the company that operates the 300.com.co website.

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions

Two days after the Estonian Registry operator, Eesti Internet, has gone live with their new registry system, they added another 1,329 new domains, effectively doubling the amount of registrations processed over the course of the preceeding two months. The new model of the registry for .EE domains is now based on selling domains through  accredited registrars instead of direct sales through the registry. The changes went along with a broadening of conditions, allowing more people to register .EE domains:

(from the site:)

• individuals are now able to register .ee domain names. For instance, they can use an e-mail address in the form firstname@lastname.ee;
• foreign nationals can now register .ee domain names. For instance, they can set up an Estonian-language e-service environment;
• one person can register more than one .ee domain name. For instance, if a company has several trademarks and wants to represent them all on the Internet under the .ee domain, they now can;
• registration of domain names will start taking place at two levels, meaning that the Estonian Internet Foundation has delegated the provision of service to registrants to registrars. The list of registrars is posted on the Estonian Internet Foundation website; and
• a regulatory fee has been established for domain names. The amount of the fee for registrants will be determined by registrars on the open market based on competition.

The transition to the new domain rules also applies to all .ee domains registered according to the old rules. These will be subject to a six-month transition period during which the domain registrants must choose a registrar and renew their domain registration with the registrar.

In parallel to the transition to the liberalised domain system, an independent body will be established within the Estonian Internet Foundation in order to resolve disputes related to domain names – the Domain Disputes Committee. The objective of the committee is to provide an expedited procedure as an alternative to judicial procedure so as to resolve any cases of misuse of domains where registration of a domain violates the rights of third parties, such as in the case of trademark infringement.

[via DomainPulse]

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Offer: .com/.net domains only $7.98/yr! Specializing in .kr domains $40/yr
Get expired / deleting domains $14.98/yr fixed price

As reported on NamePros by NameAction, the Brazilian registry operator will release 225,036 domain names this Saturday (June 5th., 2010) that were not renewed by their owners. A list of domain names is available on NameAction’s site and more information can be found on the registries’ website.

The rules for applying for any of those domain names look like they come with many limitations, such as a limitation of 20 domains per entity. Maybe someone who speaks Portuguese wants to elaborate in the comments. Thanks.

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions

Ok so I’m the first to admit when it comes to ccTLD’s, I’m far from an expert and have very few ccTLD domains.

However I know what I see.

Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve had the opportunity to watch some Sky TV (equivalent to Directv or Dish in the states) out of Mexico.

Sky has some US programming like ESPN, but all the commercials are from Mexico for a Mexican audience (of course they have a ton of spanish programming as well).

Here’s what I noticed when it comes to domains and  TV commercials in Mexico.

99% of the commercials that promote a website promote the ccTLD and not the .com, and 100% of the commercials that promote a ccTLD site use the 2nd level ccTLD of .com.mx and 0% are using the 1st level of .mx.

I have seen a lot of .MX domains hitting the auction market over the last couple of months and I even picked a couple up over at Bido.

But now that I’ve had the opportunity to watch a little TV from Mexico what I see is every company’s that has both the .com.mx and the .mx versions are using the .com.mx to advertise.

Of course for a non-ccTLD expert, this  is counter intuitive.

I would expect that companies would use a 1st level ccTLD over a 2nd level, but that’s Not what I saw, time and time again.

Check out Chevrolet.mx for example, you will see it redirects to chevrolet.com.mx, its official site in Mexico.

Google uses Google.com.mx.

Google owns Google.mx, but they don’t even forward it to Google.com.mx, the domain simply doesn’t resolve.

What does this all mean for .Mx domains?

That’s for you ccTLD experts to figure out.

However it would seem if all the big boys are using .com.mx it should be pause for concern as to the value of .mx domains.

After all that’s why none of us like .Travel, you never see it in use.

One of the reasons I never played in the ccTLD market is I thought you really need a feel for the language and culture which I never had for another country.

In the case of .Mx that might really come in handy.

With the LandRush for the .Co just a little over a month away, we got this exclusive interview with Juan Diego Calle who is the CEO of .CO Internet S.A.S., the company which is operating the registry for the ccTLD.

Juan, thanks for taking the time to educate myself and my readers on the .CO extension.

1. Tell us a little about yourself and your career background.

A: I was born in Columbia and come from a very entrepreneurial family. We moved to the US when I was fairly young and by the time I got to high school, it was clear I was going to follow the entrepreneurial path myself. My first real business was installing stereos from the garage of my parents’ house for friends from school who wanted 10, 12 or 15 inch speakers installed in their cars. The work was fun — and some of the projects so complex that they helped to get me into engineering school for college. At the age of 22, I started my first Internet company – a search-advertising network for Latin America called TeRespondo. We had a wild ride – with incredible ups and downs and we managed to survive the bubble by the skin of our teeth! The company started growing fairly quickly in 2003 and we sold it to Yahoo in early 2005. PPC had become the big thing for Yahoo and Google so it felt like the right time for us to exit. After that, I went back to business school and started contemplating my next career move. It wasn’t long before I started to focus my time and energy on investments in domain-related ventures. Through my new company, STRAAT Investments, I began acquiring and developing valuable “virtual real estate” — like FederatedTravel.com, which is a lead generator in the travel industry, where the underlying asset is a beautiful portfolio of generic geo-targeted hotel booking domain names. I guess you could say that I’ve been in love with the domain industry ever since.

2. How did you get started with the .CO registry and how did the new rollout evolve from the previous handling of the TLD.

A: Given my background and skills, I suppose I was the right person in the right place, at the right time.

Although the process to change the administration and liberalize the policies of the TLD started 10 years ago, I didn’t get fully involved until 2006. During that year a new law passed giving the Ministry of Communications regulatory oversight of the TLD and paving the way for a change in administration.

Seeing that things would soon change, I started investing in a small portfolio of .COM.CO domains with significant development value. However, in the process of doing that I learned a lot about the process and it became clear that we could add significant value if awarded the registry contract. While large industry players from around the world were hovering around the terrain, we happened to have a strong local presence, domain industry experience, investment capital, and a proven track record of running a multi-national Internet company.

Between 2006 and 2008, the Ministry held several public forums to determine the fate of the TLD and the outcome was a new Administration Policy, finally approved in July 2008. To implement it, the government published an extensive RFP in early 2009. We responded to it with Neustar under a new joint-venture called .CO Internet S.A.S. Neustar would run the technical operations and we would administer and market the TLD.

In August of 2009, after presenting a 1,165 page bid, .CO Internet S.A.S. was awarded the contract to serve as the designated Administrator for the .CO ccTLD for the next ten years. While we were up against formidable adversaries, our competitive advantage came from the strong sense of national pride that fueled our team to work 24×7 for months on end to make it happen.

On February 7th, 2010, the transition from the previous administrator was completed – safely, securely. I’m very proud of how smooth the transition was – and I think it’s a great testament to the technical and operational capacity of our team.

3. In your marketing of this extension, some are calling this “the biggest launch since .com”… What are your thoughts and the reasoning why you think .CO will be huge.

A: It’s exciting to see those comments and judging by pre-registrations, it is shaping up to be very significant. I’m not sure .CO will be the biggest considering we are working hard to keep the space clean (the irony!), but we are marketing it to a much broader audience as compared to previous TLD launches. You may have seen our marketing at domain related events and websites – that group represents only 5% of our total media spend in 2010.

As to why it will be big: I think there’s tangible demand for a global, recognizable, and credible TLD. A decent domain, critical to online success, is nonexistent – or simply too expensive for today’s entrepreneurs to afford. This is where we believe .CO will thrive – in this new era of the Internet that millions of new Internet users around the world are flocking to daily. We like to call this “The .CO Era”.

4. What do you say to those who think that .CO’s value is just as a typo?

A: I certainly appreciate the interest we have from people that know what a “typo” is. But, those are not the customers that will make this extension successful in the long term.

In the offline world, the two simple letters “CO” are recognized the world over to mean company and/or corporation. In the online world, more than 20 countries currently use .CO in their third level TLD designation (e.g., .co.uk, .co.il, .co.jp, etc.). In essence, before investing a single dollar in marketing, .CO is already meaningful and recognizable – in multiple languages and cultures.

With that in mind, our customers are the millions of people around the world coming online for the first time that need a global, recognizable, and credible branding option for their online presence. Or those who have had to settle for sub-par domain names and are excited to get a second chance to get the names of their choice.

Long term, we are targeting people with dreams, ideas or content they want to share with the world – whether based in the US, India, Brazil, China, Russia – or anywhere else – that need a global TLD instead of something local. We’re also interested in the companies that already have a local ccTLD presence, but now want to extend their brand to have a global footprint. For them – .CO is a great complement to their existing local website.

If you add these up, you have a tremendous market – “typo” or not.

5. What do you say to those who think that .co is just .cm all over again?

A: I’d say the facts tell a different story. Other than both starting with the letter “C” – there is really nothing in common between .CO and .CM.

Product, team, technology, marketing, distribution; there really isn’t much to compare.

6. Some legitimate domainers might look for typo traffic from generic, non trademark terms say eduction.co or insurance.co for example what are your thoughts ?

A: As long as the rights of brand owners are not being infringed, we do not have an opinion on the factors that investors should or shouldn’t consider when buying .CO domains.

As a personal note, I would encourage domain investors to go after names that have development or branding value way beyond their traffic potential. I believe registering names from the primary market for purposes of traffic is the equivalent of playing poker with your eyes closed. Only a few individuals out there have access to the data necessary to make the right acquisitions during a launch. Publicly available data is largely inaccurate. Hence, I can’t stress this enough: Unless you know what you’re doing, don’t waste your money!

7. What measures is the registry taking to protect large trademark holders from having their domains squatted on such as Verizon.co, Dell.co and Google.co?

A: Essentially, we are implementing most things ICANN and the IRT have been debating for years in its new gTLD process. As a ccTLD we have the benefit of being able to cherry pick and modify to our specific needs – keeping the interests of the TM community, legitimate investors, and those of end users aligned. Obviously, the end goal is to deter security threats such as phishing and pharming, making the space safer and more valuable to all those involved.

If you’re a TM attorney and want to learn more, visit us during INTA – http://www.cointernet.co/INTA

8. What about “country risk? What’s the risk of the new policy changing, the government changing, the government passing rules or restrictions on the extension?

A: I’d encourage anyone who is concerned about “country risk” to read up on Colombia and its history over the last 50 years. There is no doubt that in the past we’ve had our share of security threats due to the drug war – but that issue is largely behind us and the risk today is minimal. In fact, the investment and political climate are incredibly strong! Today, Colombia is thriving thanks to international trade, innovation and strong democratic leadership. The US, Israel, and the UK, are all countries facing significant security threats (albeit for different reasons) — yet they all enjoy strong government institutions. Colombia today is absolutely the same.

The decision to make .CO available as a global TLD was not taken lightly. The government conducted a thorough review process in its decision to provide the .CO ccTLD to the global community as an “open-ccTLD”. Actually, the question was considered and debated for more than ten years – reflecting the government’s intention to make the move thoughtfully and in a sustainable way.

As an added level of protection, an Advisory Committee that is comprised of international, government and business leaders will oversee all policy matters relating to the .CO domain. The initial concession contract to .CO Internet SAS will last for 10 years, expiring in 2020, with an option to renew for another 10.

Michael, I hope you will invite me back for another interview 10 years from now, as we are getting ready to complete our first successful term as the administrator of .CO!

9. What makes this different than .biz, .info, .mobi .me, .tel or any other TLD?

A: The TLDs you mentioned all enjoy specific niche markets – which is great if that’s what you need for your online branding. .CO is different in that it is more general in meaning and is not niche specific. It’s a globally meaningful, memorable and broadly applicable domain platform.

Beyond having a good product, we are also launching a multi-million dollar global marketing and communications campaign to help drive demand by educating small business owners, web developers and entrepreneurs about leveraging .CO to build their business or brand online. For example, check out: Pitch.co

These aspects, coupled with broad distribution through the largest and most well respected registrars are significant points of distinction.

10. Can you briefly talk about the domains that existed in the prior TLD administration.

A: We inherited 28,000 domains from the previous administration. All were third level domains such as domain.com.co and domain.net.co. Given the policy restrictions of the past, most were company names or trademarks.

We will continue operating and marketing these names to a local audience. However, as was done in other countries, the new policy gave existing 3rd level registrants (prior to July 2008) priority to register the 2nd level equivalent. Because of this, about 4,000 names were “grandfathered” during March of 2010.

11. Some domainers have raised the issue that some valuable generics have already been registered. How is that?

A: After the new law passed in 2006 a new administration policy was clearly imminent and people started registering third level domains hoping to one day get the second level version. From that point until July of 2008, there was a speculative “landrush” where approximately 1,500 valuable generic terms were registered. It’s a small number because the policy restrictions were extremely complex and the registrations costs very high. Specifically, you could register generic terms if you had a trademark or matching company name.

As I mentioned in your second question, that is in fact how I became involved in this process.

12. Can you talk briefly about the rollout.  You have Sunrise that is opened now, how can one apply for it and what documentation do they need.  Then comes Landrush which is pretty much a priority service.  If you’re the only applicant during Landrush you get the domain.  What happens if there is more than one Landrush application for the domain?

A: We put in place a very structured Launch Plan in an effort to make sure there is a stable and orderly distribution of domain names. The plan starts with a comprehensive Sunrise period for trademark holders, a Landrush period for those interested in names of high commercial value, and finally General Availability.

Global Sunrise began on April 23rd and continues through June 10th. Trademark holders within valid jurisdictions can apply for exact match domain names. Trademark applications will be validated by Deloitte and multiple applications for the same domain name will be resolved at auction. To apply for a domain name during Sunrise, you need to submit evidence of ownership of a trademark of national effect from any country in the world. Evidentiary requirements are higher for generic terms and dictionary words.

Then, Landrush will be held from June 21st through July 10th. Anyone can apply for a domain name of high commercial value during this time. Single applications will be awarded at the end of the Landrush period and matching applications will be resolved at auction.

General availability will begin on July 20th, 2010 on a first-come, first-served basis.

If you’re interested in all the rules, you can download the Launch & Registration Rules here.

13. Those who have pre-reserved general registration domains will be out of luck if someone puts a landrush application on the name correct?

A: Yes

14. On pre-registrations each registrar seems to be only accepting one application per domain is this correct?

A: Every registrar has its’ own business practices and procedures. I can’t say for certain whether this is true with every registrar – although I do know for many registrars it seems to be the case. It certainly makes good sense to manage the process in this way.

15. Which registrars are currently taking pre registrations?

A: We are working with ten core accredited .CO registrars, and their respective reseller networks. Our ten core partners include: GoDaddy.com, Register.com, NetworkSolutions.com, Dotster.com, eNomCentral.com, Tucows (OpenSRS.com), MelbourneIT.com, United Internet (1and1.com & InternetX.com), and two local registrars in Colombia – Mi.com.co and ClickPanda.com.co. These Registrars have committed to following international best practices to ensure the integrity and value of the name space for all who participate.

Some of the registrars that are reselling .CO domain names in our extended network are Mark Monitor, CSC, DomainMonster, Key-Systems and Moniker, to name just a few.

Most are taking pre-registrations already and aggressively marketing .CO domains – including featuring .CO on their homepages.

16. What’s your vision for .CO?  What should we expect to see in 5, 10, 20 years?

A: In the long term, I’m confident that it will become the world’s leading domain extension in terms of new registrations.

Keep in mind that during the next decade, most Internet growth will come from outside the US and .CO is perfectly positioned for that because of its global significance.

From a marketing standpoint, we’ll be working hard to position .CO amongst the fastest growing Internet markets around the world as a platform for secure Internet commerce and 21st century innovation.

17. Finally, this is a topic of particular interest to domain investors: Will .CO’s be treated differently by Google/Yahoo in the SERPS?

A: There is a lot of misinformation about this subject matter so I’m glad you’ve brought it up.

It boils down to this: Google/Yahoo and search engines in general, do not determine the policy aspects or intended use of a specific TLD. The governing body that has oversight for the TLD determines it.

Therefore, if there are in fact algorithmic weights applied towards extension types (whatever they may be), we’ll be working with the relevant parties so that they are not in conflict with the intended use for .CO. We are certainly not the first ones to face this issue and are working to ensure our registrants don’t face issues here.

Juan we wish you the best of luck for a successful launch and operation of the registry.

According to TLD Source and The Register large parts of the .DE zone file went missing today from 1:30 pm to roughly 2:50 pm. The error shut down potentially over 13 million domains names tied to websites and email addresses using the German domain name extension.

Speculation to the cause of the outage centers around the theory that the zone files may have been uploaded with no data.  TLD Source also speculates on their site that the DENIC infrastructure may be outdated .

DENIC acknowledged the problem on their site (German) and will be providing more details.  In a statement on another mailing list found cited by The Register, DENIC stated :  “Several of the authoritative nameservers for the DE top level domain returned NXDOMAIN responses for a yet to be determined number of DE domains that existed in our registration database,” the post reads. “At [13:45 UTC], all affected servers had either been disabled or fed with an earlier version of the DE zone. Regular operations were eventually resumed at 15:00 UTC.”

Last October, a similar problem occurred when a typo shut down the .SE ccTLD  for roughly 20 minutes.

---

[ Thanks to our non-German friends at Silver Dollars for the tip]

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions