3 ms·

I understand that the current situation is a bit of a money grab, but what is the rational for TLDs not being arbitrary in the first place? Isn't it all just le

• xorcist 11y ago
  Not at all arbitrary. Some organizations do a much better job than others maintaining, developing and generally being good Internet citizens. We've had much good come from the Dutch, German and Swedish TLDs for example (but also many others). They also have a self interest in handling conflicts responsibly and being proactive about new laws, and the juridical status of domain ownership, because they're in it for the long run. I wish I could say the same about for example Verisign...
• lqdc13 11y ago
  I think it would be useful if the companies buying the TLDs were not allowed to buy more than 100 or so of 2nd level domains within that TLD and forced the price to be something non-trivial like $30. Then owning all the 2nd level domains would be prohibitively expensive and would actually be useful for people coming up with a good domain name.
• gaius 11y ago
  I am old enough to remember when .com .net and .org really did mean what they said. Now only .edu and .mil do.
  • bhartzer 11y ago
    But that's changing. We have closed TLDs like .NYC, whereas you have to have an address in that geographical area to own one of those. And we have .bank launching, you have to actually be a financial institution in order to have a .bank domain. We will be able to trust those new TLDs, this is all changing back (to the way it should be).