All the discussion details are overwhelming but I do seem to feel there
is a marketing and branding problem especially when it comes to
searching a domain at the USER DATA ENTRY LEVEL, i.e. slow keyboard input.
For example, I own WINSERVER.COM. Try typing WINSERVER in google (for
the first time, clear cache is necessary) and see how the
auto-suggestion goes as you type and searching for it yield not
WINSERVER.COM first, but places related to WINdows SERVERS like
microsoft first. The last time I tried it on a friend's PC to prove the
point, it was the 3rd hit after two Microsoft links were shown.
I think it is unfair and if I was really worry about it is possible
subject to some long time usage trade marking infringement claim. Why
is GOOGLE is not, from a technical standpoint, yielding the DNS answer
first, with the WINSERVER.COM site first?
Of course, I understand the money, profit, business side of it, and also
a technical side with the Google's "smart" BI algorithms used. But most
people who would be searching for WINSERVER, they are not really
interested in "WINDOWS SERVERS" first.
I don't think its a winning battle, but there are some ethical issues
that could be addressed as a global common. Perhaps an I-D can be
written to SUGGEST that Searching Techniques SHOULD check the DNS
solution first. That may include the dotless answer I suppose as well.
--
HLS
On 7/12/2013 12:41 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:23 PM, John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
domains are going to be dotless and three of the biggest dotless
domains
are going to be called .apple and .microsoft and .google and they are
going
I've read the applications for .apple, .microsoft, and .google. None
of them propose to use dotless names, only the usual 2LDs. At this
pont there is just one application that proposes a dotless name,
Google's .search, and it's far from clear what will happen to that, or
even if that application would beat out the competing ones from
Amazon, Donuts and dot Now, none of which are dotless.
Do you think they are lying when they say they won't be dotless?
R's,
John
PS: The applications are all linked here. The financial info is
redacted, but the technical stuff is all present.
https://gtldresult.icann.org/
I think the people who wrote those applications on behalf of their
employers are likely to find that other parts of their organization have a
different view after the results are awarded.
There are two parts to the DNS business don't forget. Is Andrew really sure
that if dns.com decides to help users out by returning the A record for
www.microsoft in response to a request for microsoft. and this turns out to
have commercial value that his employer is not going to do the exact same
thing even over his objections? Do you think that DNS.com is going to lose
business to a competitor?
[dns.com is owned by my employer and we also provide recursive DNS services]
I remember all the squeaking and outrage about sitefinder back in the day.
That wasn't my idea but I went along with it as a way to give ICANN a kick
up the rear and stop blocking all progress out of fear of lawsuits. How
many of the people who complained then now work for companies that deploy
the same type of system with the same technical impact? I think you will
find that it is actually quite a large number.
Only five years ago the US banks managed to create a trillion dollar
meltdown because they didn't understand that the perverse market dynamics
they had created would force many of their companies into bankruptcy. And
if the banks had come to that realization and explained the situation to
the Treasury or the Fed they would have had no difficulty getting a
regulatory regime established that would have protected their businesses.
That didn't happen.
Don't expect me to take a stand on your principles. And certainly don't
expect me to endorse a statement of principles if I didn't even have the
opportunity to discuss it before issue.
Most people are averse to chaos. Don't bet your businesses that others are
going to be averse to it.