Interesting article. One concern is that the steep cost of the new TLDs might make it more difficult to establish a domain name that has "credibility". For inst

Interesting article. One concern is that the steep cost of the new TLDs might make it more difficult to establish a domain name that has "credibility". For instance, second-level domains under .com might eventually be seen by some consumers as "second-rate" ("inferior goods" in economic terms, perhaps the way some users view non-.com domains like .biz now). Sites with their own TLD might be seen as more credible consumer destinations, establishing 2 different tiers of credibility, and reinforcing the standing of incumbent e-commerce sites. You can imagine that having your own TLD might factor into your search engine rankings at some point or might be given more leeway by spam detectors. The steep $185K registration fee for a service whose cost to provide and maintain is pretty miniscule in comparison does not level the playing field. Simultaneously this weds ICANN even more strongly to the interests of deep-pocketed clients and would make it even harder for non-commercial entities to get fair treatment. Wealthy organizations should not have special privileges when it comes to naming rights. Especially when the supply of naming rights is essentially unlimited. This is a good example where a quasi-public good with nearly limitless supply is privatized and made artificially scarce for the benefit of a few. And what about users who register second-level domains within a privately-managed TLD? Would they be subject to even more sweeping seizures and shutdowns for objectionable content? ICANN may find it easier to deflect both the responsibility and blame for such "oversight" onto privately-managed TLDs once the number of such domains increases. "Sorry your domain was snatched, but you'll have to take it up with .SomeTLD." Hopefully P2P-DNS and namecoin will gain traction.