I think that there's another POV which was argued out in the early 00's, which is, given appropriate reliability, security and social checks and balances, there is no compelling technical reason for tld's to be restricted. I'd say IDN spoofing is a way bigger issue than wilting brand tlds. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2018/03/look-alike-domains-and-visual-confusion/ On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018, 9:47 AM Michele Neylon - Blacknight, < michele@blacknight.com> wrote:
Several of the .brands that have dropped their TLDs either weren’t using them at all or have rebranded.
Carlton's original point still stands.
ICANN steamrolls ahead with new rounds of TLDs, surrounded by those who have gone through lengthy, expensive acquisition processes only to walk away.
The only constituencies within ICANN who want this continued march to oblivion are those with financial interest. And the march takes place during a period of increasing conflict with governments that demonstrates the naked hubris and disregard for the public interest.
If ICANN had any sense of self-preservation it would put its pathetic expansion efforts on hold while it ponders the consequences of defying global privacy regulations. But the culture of industry entitlement is so deeply entrenched that such sensible reflection is unlikely. Still possible, but unlikely. And At-Large will still be there to help provide guidance should ICANN come to its senses.
Otherwise, the lemming march continues and the multilaterals lay in wait.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- -