Question: What do you see as being unnecessary vs. necessary restrictions on the creation of new TLDs?

Nominee Replies

Masanobu Katoh - posted on 2000-10-04 09:58:04 Protection of IP is always an important consideration for the healthy development of the Internet. When we are issuing new TLDs, we should consider the potential impact of such new TLDs. Are we creating an additional risk of cybersquatting or not? We need to work hard to decide on the issues raised by the DNSO’s Working Group B and to ensure effective enforcement of the UDRP. Sureswaran Ramadass - posted on 2000-09-29 06:29:03 Limiting the number of TLDs is one. Having a unbiased committee select the suitable ones. Also, a serious set of rules governing this new TLDs must be in place first, to ensure proper implementation. This includes cybersquatting, which has become a serious problem. Dont want to have to createanother UDRP for these new TLDs. Lulin Gao - posted on 2000-09-28 02:23:15 To answer you question, I would like to say that in order to introduce new TLDs, we should first make classifications of domain names. For instance, no or less restrictions should be imposed with respect to registration of domain names for individual and non-commercial purposes. As to commercial domain names, restrictions should be put in place so that the introduction of new TLDs would be carried out in a measured and controlled manner and to get more experience to further improve the implementation of the existing UDRP with the purpose of preventing cybersquatting. Johannes Chiang - posted on 2000-09-27 10:13:05 The statement in my webpages: To extend the new gTLD without unnecessary restrictions in addition to the considerations of reliability and stability. We could also consider to arrange an Alpha-test time for a new gTLD. A new gTLD should not damage the reliability and stability of the existing DNS, or we must construct the system as a whole. Clearly, this is the necessary restriction and can be measured with technical aspect. And, the new gTLD should not bring ambiguity to the exsiting DNS, or we may at least encounter problems in relation to paragraph 4 of UDRP. The rest of the statements I have heard as the causes to restrict the new gTLDs are often unneccessary. For instance, we don't know how many people really need it, it will damage the efficiency, we don't have enough time to do it and so on. Whatever a restriction becomes a debate of we could not do that or we would not do that, that's unnecessary.