9 ms·
Google owns TLDs: .web .meme and .lol
- notreallyserio 5y agoThey also have .new, enabling links like https://sheets.new https://sheets.new.
- jefftk 5y agoMore details: https://whats.new/ https://whats.new/
- LudwigNagasena 5y agoThat looks awful as a concept. I hope it doesn’t get any traction.
- Kiro 5y agoIt already has traction. sheets.new is a very common shortcut.
- judge2020 5y agoSome of these are pretty pretentious and it means one company can claim the 2ld for their industry, eg https://story.new https://story.new and https://repo.new https://repo.new
- Arainach 5y agoThat's no different from the current world. Three different apps claim to just be "Messenger" on my phone. Books.com goes to only one seller.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- loceng 5y agoI wonder if it feels more natural for different cultures or language structures, to me doing something like sheets.new isn't the order I output in - something like "/new sheets" (and without the .) feels normal, natural, but perhaps because of my own personal experience and exposures.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y agoIn fairness, that's because domains are for some reason written backwards from the rest of the URL anyways. By rights, that URL should be https://new.sheets/ https://new.sheets/ just as this discussion should be https://com.ycombinator.news/item?id=29769511 https://com.ycombinator.news/item?id=29769511
- remus 5y agoWhy? From my point of view it's no different from any other 'pretty' domain name.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y agoA TLD shouldn't have semantic meaning already covered by protocol operations.
- ViViDboarder 5y agoWhat do I put in my URL bar to make it POST?
- chrismorgan 5y agoI agree, writing more about my reasoning last year at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27162905 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27162905. It gets you an only slightly shorter URL, while significantly diluting trust.
- kingcharles 5y agoA lot of these TLDs just put anything up to justify their reasoning for registering the domain. They don't believe that is how the domain will be (ab)used, but they have to publicly provide some nonsense reason for its existence. I looked up the application for .one gTLD today. I own a subdomain and I wanted to know the original reasoning behind it. It is (now) owned by one.com and they basically told ICANN "we are going to do ONE stuff with it. Like stuff to do with ONE. And we have customers. And like, er, Beanie Babies?" And ICANN said "That sounds excellent, here's the domain, please continue with your master plan."
- tialaramex 5y agoFor the most part ICANN is doing them a solid. If your name lacks any real purpose, you are going to be on the hook paying for the registry to exist with nowhere near enough customers to justify it existence. So, get a purpose or expect to throw away your money. Successful non-CC TLDs are rare. There are a few, but they have a clear purpose. For example Russia's .рф is er... for Russian stuff. In Russian. But what is .horse really for? Not very much besides hooking me up with "My Lovely Horse" http://my.lovely.horse/ http://my.lovely.horse/ any time I want to listen to it again.
- kingcharles 5y agoThat's awesome. As soon as I heard it I thought "That sounds like The Divine Comedy" and I looked it up, and there it was. Fantastic. Can highly recommend the rest of The Divine Comedy's oeuvre too.
- tialaramex 5y agoYes. I can likewise recommend the British TV comedy that clip is from, "Father Ted".
- ElectronShak 5y agoBefore Reddit settled on the name "reddit", snew was one of their name ideas..as in "what'snew"...another was 360scope
- jefftk 5y agoIs that the origin of the mascot, Snoo?
- ElectronShak 5y agoExactly
- severak_cz 5y agonever seen those in use
- Kiro 5y agoI use it all the time. It's nothing you can see "in use" since it's just a shortcut for opening a new Google Spreadsheet, like an alias in your address bar.
- petee 5y agoSo the ICANN application says they will apply no restrictions to registrants, yet when you try to register they have a requirement that you provide certain content, and by a deadline - is this not in violation of the application? -- https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/applicationdetails:downloadapplication/508?t:ac=508 https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/applicationde... -- "the .new gTLD will best add value to the gTLD space by remaining purely open and unencumbered by registrant restrictions. There will, therefore, be no restrictions on second-level domain name registrations in the proposed gTLD, .new." -- "Extension Requirements .NEW is open to anyone but all domain names must be used for action generation or online content creation where the user should be able to “create” something without any further navigation. Examples from Google include docs.new and slides.new, which resolve to a new document creation page. Any .NEW domain name need to be live within 100 days of registration"
- judge2020 5y agoThe list of all their owned TLDs are at [0]. There is an icannwiki page with all the ones they’ve applied for, but not just the ones they currently own. 0: https://ntldstats.com/registry/Charleston-Road-Registry-Inc https://ntldstats.com/registry/Charleston-Road-Registry-Inc
- nothis 5y agoHow can a commercial company own a top level domain like ".app"? I get that they own .youtube or .google but isn't that way too generic? Like a company owning the copyright for the word "Company"?
- judge2020 5y agoBecause gTLDs were sold to the highest bidder; there’s no requirement for them to be sold for the good of humanity. For-profit companies like Verisign own .com and donuts owns a few hundred https://donuts.domains/what-we-do/top-level-domain-portfolio/ https://donuts.domains/what-we-do/top-level-domain-portfolio...
- wbl 5y agoVerizon does not own .com in the same way as people owning other gTLDs. They operate it under contract with ICANN
- kijeda 5y agoIt may seem like a pedantic point, but these top-level domains are not owned. They currently have registry operation rights which does not confer permanent ownership.
- derefr 5y agoThese companies don't really "own" the names. They're paying $180k/yr for the privilege of ICANN delegating the responsibility of managing that gTLD to them. But this privilege isn't any kind of legal right; the company doesn't have a deed to or easement on that gTLD that would hold up in court. ICANN has just agreed, as their side of the contract, to 1. accept that company's zone-registration modifications vis-a-vis that gTLD; and 2. to not accept any other third-party entity's zone-registration modifications vis-a-vis the gTLD. But if ICANN don't like what's going on, they always have the right to just cancel the relationship (probably with a pro-rated refund for the rest of the contract period, but still) and then do what they like with the gTLD from there. The thing I'd compare it most closely to, is an exclusive licensing of IP rights from a copyright-holder to another entity, where those rights include a sub-licensing right. While that contract pertains, the entity who licensed the rights can basically act as if they owned those rights; but the actual legal right-holder can always just revoke the licensing agreement — in the process, either "absorbing" the transitive license grants to themselves, anuling those transitive licenses, or finding a new contract-holder and transferring the "stewardship" of those transitive licenses to them.
- edoceo 5y agoAnd .dev, which IIRC they were not going to make public but then did. And requires SSL
- spcebar 5y agoI get the issue of making .dev public, what's the issue with requiring ssl certs beside it being unnecessary in some cases?
- dijit 5y agoIf you were using .dev locally before then you almost certainly didn’t have TLS, since it’s usually local testing. By making TLS mandatory you not only break local dev environments (that use that TLD which maybe have a legitimate domain outside of your network) you also make it so that it’s not even possible to run locally unless you do a lot of CA trickery to get a legit looking TLS cert. My personal opinion was that this was a good move, as it forced developers to stop using .dev as soon as it was being used on the global internet- which avoided a lot of really awkward and annoying dual-home misconfigurations.
- steventhedev 5y agoThe fact that it broke anything for anyone is a strong argument that it never should have been created in the first place, alongside .home and .corp. They were aware of the issue, buried it in the report and reneged on their promise to keep it internal-only. That was the mitigating argument for allowing it despite the known existing usage. Google acted in bad faith and I'd need to see concrete proof to convince me otherwise.
- dijit 5y agoI agree with you completely; I had this discussion 41 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29304536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29304536
- Sebb767 5y ago
- Closi 5y agoIf ICANN wasn't just a giant extortion racket they would have yanked this from Google squatting on it years ago - clearly they haven't actually met any of the listed goals considering they have never used the TLD (or opened them for general availability like their original application implies). In reality all ICANN cares about is $$$
- danlugo92 5y ago#Web3 Fixes this
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- kingcharles 5y agoDon't know if this is a joke. "Web3" makes problems like this even more complicated because domain name resolution needs a single central point of trust.
- dmingod666 5y agoI'm sure someone can make an ICO to "solve" that problem, write a white paper and promptly disappear after the pump and dump is over.
- ktorvald 5y agoWeb3 has been used to mean too many things (NFTs ETH crypto etc). Blockchains offer the ability to fix centralized choke points on the Internet, and some prefer Dweb (decentralized web) as a term to describe this.
- Closi 5y agoOh god, I don't need my domain to be another form of currency. If Web3 ever becomes a thing I look forward to seeing the chaos that ensues when the inevitable happens, and a major domain name gets stolen with absolutely zero dispute resolution and where the attackers can also hijack all incoming traffic to steal credentials or install malware. Then it will be mathematically impossible to recover without paying whatever ransom the attackers like for the return (if the attackers even decide they want to sell!). DNS Poisoning was bad enough, this would be a total wipeout.
- hereforphone 5y agoIn a sense, dangerous. Google has a history of (and currently practices) censoring viewpoints it disagrees with. Will its censorship reach extend from omitting / deprioritizing search results to entirely canceling those using its TLDs that it deems undesirable?
- NicoJuicy 5y agoSource? What i see, is that it's blocking illegal things.
- Levitz 5y agoWell, there is the Wikipedia article [1] but even there most of what it mentions could be considered hearsay, so I'll go with a couple others: - 4chan's /pol/ board straight up doesn't show up. It's easy to directly go to a board by writing "4chan" and the correspondent letters, /pol/ is censored from the results though, this is most probably political in nature since even /b/ shows up. - The "substitute" for the r/The_Donald subreddit at communities.win is similarly unreachable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google
- colejohnson66 5y agoCensoring their search results is not the same as censoring domain names
- hereforphone 5y agoRead the original comment again.
- hereforphone 5y agoAnecdotally the same for other sites like KiwiFarms. I may not agree with all content posted on such sites, nor spend my day there, but I certainly don't believe in censoring unpopular opinions. There were also screenshots of Google censorship posted during the 2016 election that were concerning and I verified a subset of these myself. Regardless of one's political and social viewpoints, we should stand united against censorship.
- FinanceAnon 5y agoIs "TLD hogging" going to be the new "domain hogging"?
- bluefox 5y agoICANN is a fat American corporate body. At some point ISLANNDs (Internet Small Local Authority for Name and Number Designations) could override it. That way, you could link to http://google.lol/posts/39-put-google-in-the-can http://google.lol/posts/39-put-google-in-the-can and your cohort will enjoy this and the rest of those posts making fun of google, while the rest of the world is disappointed over dead links.
- hrhrhrhrhr 5y agoWhat does it take to register a new TLD?
- detaro 5y agoIn the last round which spawned all the "new gTLDs", pretty much everybody could apply who could afford the $185k application fee and $25k/year maintenance fee and could present some plan on how they'd use and run the TLD.
- edmcnulty101 5y agoCould someone write a browser extension to override DNS? And basically create a new domain system for people with that extension installed?
- detaro 5y agoThe "usual" way of doing that is by making DNS servers that create their responses based on whatever other name resolution system you want them to do.
- icedchai 5y agoSomething similar was attempted decades ago and failed, with alternate DNS roots. See AlterNIC for an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlterNIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlterNIC
- doublerabbit 5y agoAnd opennic.org
- hanniabu 5y agoENS is the way forward
- ted0 5y agoGoogle does not own .web. They were in the running to acquire it but it will ultimately go to Verisign (who runs .com) after a ~5 year legal dispute.
- randy408 5y agoGoogle does not own .lol either.
- kingcharles 5y agoRight. And .lol is open for business. I was registering one yesterday.
- ksec 5y agoYes, for a moment I thought Google acquired .web from Verisign. Latest News on .web [1] >after a ~5 year legal dispute. Is it finally "settled"? It seems some are suggesting Afilias will continue to sue. [1] https://circleid.com/posts/20211228-irp-panel-sanctions-afilias-clears-the-way-for-icann-to-decide-.web-disputes https://circleid.com/posts/20211228-irp-panel-sanctions-afil...
- c7DJTLrn 5y agoYou can have a cool TLD too. You just have to bribe ICANN.
- bellyfullofbac 5y agoAh, every time I read about vanity TLDs (are they called that? Can I call them that?) I sigh at the brokenness of attaching structure/constraints to domains and TLDs... At least the country TLDs made sense, plus things like .org for non-profits and .gov for US governments. And then things like bit.ly, look.at, blah.io overrode all of that. I wonder what ".lol" should be for, parody sites? Like whitehouse.lol, google.lol? ycombinator.lol? The first 2 probably can't exist because hey, this is an oligocracy. Congrats to AOL, I guess, their idea with AOL keywords was actually superior, and we're returning to that. Already on TV ads that I see, they just say "Search for $BRAND/$PRODUCT to find out more".
- ChrisArchitect 5y agoFix the title OP to just Google owns .meme or something since the rest is incorrect.