4 ms·

Its a free market. If amazon acts like a clown with .author, authors won't use it. If they abuse their position once it is actually influential, they can be sue

Its a free market. If amazon acts like a clown with .author, authors won't use it. If they abuse their position once it is actually influential, they can be sued and have their right to registrant revoked. simple as that. I don't understand your Chicago argument. No one is forcing anyone to use .author, .book, or anything else. It is one of hundreds (and soon to possibly be thousands) of available TLDs. This just seems like a steaming pile of FUD

ceol 14y ago
Sued by whom? I only see another large corporation being able to take on Amazon. Then we're in the same boat as before. These TLDs are supposed to be generic, not country-specific like .ly or .io or .uk. Giving private entities control over them is an all-around bad idea.
- cleverjake 14y ago
  >Sued by whom ICANN. They are the final say over domains, and can revoke any TLD at will. >These TLDs are supposed to be generic, not country-specific like .ly or .io or .uk. Giving private entities control over them is an all-around bad idea. What is 'generic' to you? Either way, you need to satisfy some form of requirement to the organization that owns the root server. Giving amazon control of .whatever is no more dangerous than giving north korea control of .kp.
  - ceol 14y ago
    If ICANN has the final say, they don't need to sue them then, do they? > Giving amazon control of .whatever is no more dangerous than giving north korea control of .kp. The TLD denotes some sort of category. Giving North Korea control over .kp is fine because .kp represents North Korea. Giving Amazon.com control over .books is not fine because .books does not represent Amazon.com, nor is Amazon.com representative of the concept of books. If they were giving .books to the American Library Association, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Do you see the difference?
    - x1 14y ago
      What if amazon bought book.com and then sold subdomains? So harrypotter.book.com?
      - ceol 14y ago
        I wouldn't have a problem with that since it's a .com (which means a commercial website.) I would really like to see the Library of Congress get .books and make each ISBN a domain.
        cleverjake 14y ago
        If they make a request for it, they will most likely get it. ICANN has stated they will give preference to non profit/community programs. I would assume the LoC would fall into that category.
    - cleverjake 14y ago
      >If ICANN has the final say, they don't need to sue them then, do they? Sue was a misnomer. The point being amazon wouldn't have ultimate control. They could lose it. >The TLD denotes some sort of category. Giving North Korea control over .kp is fine because .kp represents North Korea. Giving Amazon.com control over .books is not fine because .books does not represent Amazon.com, nor is Amazon.com representative of the concept of books. If they were giving .books to the American Library Association, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Yes, I just disagree with it. This is a slippery slope on a slippery slope argument. Amazon is more representing of books on the whole that the US Goverment represent all of .gov(ernment) and ICANN represent all com(panies). In order for your argument to hold water, you would need to show that having a .book domain is inherently valuable. If it isn't then it is of zero consequence. Google doesn't care that there isn't a google.kp becuase it doesn't matter. If we are to assume that we are several years in the future, amazon has been given control over .book, and they are now basically required socially for any kind of book tour/signing/press junket etc, /and/ if amazon starts turning people away who don't give them good deals, then sure, i'll be standing right beside you. And ICANN would most likely react with a request to change behavior from amazon, or they would take it away and manage it themselves. But I can practically guarantee that a. .books won't be that popular b. amazon won't prevent a single author from getting a .book (they would just be turning away possible sources of income) In the end, none of this will really matter.

ceol 14y ago

Sued by whom? I only see another large corporation being able to take on Amazon. Then we're in the same boat as before. These TLDs are supposed to be generic, not country-specific like .ly or .io or .uk. Giving private entities control over them is an all-around bad idea.

cleverjake 14y ago
>Sued by whom ICANN. They are the final say over domains, and can revoke any TLD at will. >These TLDs are supposed to be generic, not country-specific like .ly or .io or .uk. Giving private entities control over them is an all-around bad idea. What is 'generic' to you? Either way, you need to satisfy some form of requirement to the organization that owns the root server. Giving amazon control of .whatever is no more dangerous than giving north korea control of .kp.
- ceol 14y ago
  If ICANN has the final say, they don't need to sue them then, do they? > Giving amazon control of .whatever is no more dangerous than giving north korea control of .kp. The TLD denotes some sort of category. Giving North Korea control over .kp is fine because .kp represents North Korea. Giving Amazon.com control over .books is not fine because .books does not represent Amazon.com, nor is Amazon.com representative of the concept of books. If they were giving .books to the American Library Association, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Do you see the difference?
  - x1 14y ago
    What if amazon bought book.com and then sold subdomains? So harrypotter.book.com?
    - ceol 14y ago
      I wouldn't have a problem with that since it's a .com (which means a commercial website.) I would really like to see the Library of Congress get .books and make each ISBN a domain.
      - cleverjake 14y ago
        If they make a request for it, they will most likely get it. ICANN has stated they will give preference to non profit/community programs. I would assume the LoC would fall into that category.
  - cleverjake 14y ago
    >If ICANN has the final say, they don't need to sue them then, do they? Sue was a misnomer. The point being amazon wouldn't have ultimate control. They could lose it. >The TLD denotes some sort of category. Giving North Korea control over .kp is fine because .kp represents North Korea. Giving Amazon.com control over .books is not fine because .books does not represent Amazon.com, nor is Amazon.com representative of the concept of books. If they were giving .books to the American Library Association, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Yes, I just disagree with it. This is a slippery slope on a slippery slope argument. Amazon is more representing of books on the whole that the US Goverment represent all of .gov(ernment) and ICANN represent all com(panies). In order for your argument to hold water, you would need to show that having a .book domain is inherently valuable. If it isn't then it is of zero consequence. Google doesn't care that there isn't a google.kp becuase it doesn't matter. If we are to assume that we are several years in the future, amazon has been given control over .book, and they are now basically required socially for any kind of book tour/signing/press junket etc, /and/ if amazon starts turning people away who don't give them good deals, then sure, i'll be standing right beside you. And ICANN would most likely react with a request to change behavior from amazon, or they would take it away and manage it themselves. But I can practically guarantee that a. .books won't be that popular b. amazon won't prevent a single author from getting a .book (they would just be turning away possible sources of income) In the end, none of this will really matter.