BBC News: .wales and .cymru internet domain names find support
"A survey of Welsh businesses and consumers suggests a majority of both support the nation getting its own domain name. The move would offer website owners the chance to end their address with .wales and .cymru, instead of .uk. Internet regulator ICANN will allow countries and other organisations to apply for the new names from January. Supporters say it could help with branding, but critics warn it may increase the opportunity for fraud. The poll was commissioned by the not-for-profit domain registry service Nominet. It suggests 69% of consumers backed the move and 59% of Welsh businesses and other bodies. The poll used a sample of 1,003 individuals - 21% of whom were Welsh speakers - and 250 senior decision makers in Welsh organisations However the survey suggested splits over which name to take." Read rest of article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15658689
It should be noted that the survey was done by the registry for .uk, and I would want to know whether it would be the group to apply for the Welsh TLD(s) before I would accept the impartiality of the survey. I also note that no question was made regarding whether Welsh taxpayers would be willing to pay the substantial costs incurred by creating the registry (I can't see such an effort proceeding without subsidy from the Welsh Office, they've already spent £20,000 and the BBC article suggests no more is forthcoming). Or whether businesses operating UK-wide might object to having to register (and pay for) domains in .uk *and* .cymru *and*.wales (along with perhaps .scot). The website of the Welsh Nationalists<http://www.english.plaidcymru.org/?force=1>makes zero mention of a welsh TLD, so the issue isn't on their radar (I guess, because if Welsh Nationalists get their way, Wales will qualifty for a ccTLD without needing $185,000 to get it). Reading further down the article, it looks like the survey is an indication of a fight between Nominet and an existing community effort <http://www.dotcym.org/home/> All this ... in the face of the Prime Minister of Wales coming out explicitly against *any* TLD effort <http://www.dotcym.org/home/?p=151>! In other words ... and as so frequently is the case ... except for the people who stand to generate revenue from the effort and a handful of national-pride geeks, this seems to be a a solution in search of a problem. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 On 10 November 2011 13:27, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin@ttcsweb.org> wrote:
"A survey of Welsh businesses and consumers suggests a majority of both support the nation getting its own domain name. The move would offer website owners the chance to end their address with .wales and .cymru, instead of .uk.
Internet regulator ICANN will allow countries and other organisations to apply for the new names from January.
Supporters say it could help with branding, but critics warn it may increase the opportunity for fraud. The poll was commissioned by the not-for-profit domain registry service Nominet. It suggests 69% of consumers backed the move and 59% of Welsh businesses and other bodies.
The poll used a sample of 1,003 individuals - 21% of whom were Welsh speakers - and 250 senior decision makers in Welsh organisations However the survey suggested splits over which name to take."
Read rest of article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15658689 _______________________________________________ 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
Be wary ... There is a similarity between the relationship of Wales (or Scotland, etc) to the UK as there is in the relationship of California (or Texas, etc) to the United States. The argument that supports a TLD for Wales would also argue for a TLD for California. And the same would hold for any division of any federalized national structure with a two-tier division of sovereignty. Before advocating these kinds of things it would be wise to come up with some sort of principle that could be used to separate those cases that one would accept and ones that one would reject. For instance, should there be a TLD for Aquitaine? (Probably not, but we do already have one for Catalonia.) Without an articulation of broadly accepted principles to guide the choices this process will end up in chaos. --karl--
+1 to Karl. .... we do have some of those 'broad principles' on the road. What might be shaping up here is the convergence - of a kind - between the notion of a ccTLD and the efficacy of geographic names in a gTLD setting. We're seeing a manifestation of the struggle to have universal acceptance of those principles. [The issue of colonial territories with designated ccTLD is part of this as well; think Las Malvinas/Falkland Islands. Even if 'new' ones are articulated around this issue, the struggle will continue. Evan noted that contrary objectives are sometimes responsible for fueling these arguments, meaning they will remain unencumbered by these 'broad principles'. This is a indirect recognition of the politics of things. Can't escape the politics. And ICANN - no better or worse than any institution so situated - will respond to it in some way, shape or form. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote:
Be wary ... There is a similarity between the relationship of Wales (or Scotland, etc) to the UK as there is in the relationship of California (or Texas, etc) to the United States.
The argument that supports a TLD for Wales would also argue for a TLD for California.
And the same would hold for any division of any federalized national structure with a two-tier division of sovereignty.
Before advocating these kinds of things it would be wise to come up with some sort of principle that could be used to separate those cases that one would accept and ones that one would reject.
For instance, should there be a TLD for Aquitaine? (Probably not, but we do already have one for Catalonia.)
Without an articulation of broadly accepted principles to guide the choices this process will end up in chaos.
--karl--
_______________________________________________ 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
The essential difference between a ccTLD and a GTLD is the fact that ccTLD's don't have to invest such a huge amount to start, even not when running the TLD there is no obligation to pay yearly fees to ICANN. This is totally different for the GTLD. So, it is in favor of ICANN to accept the Welsh application as it would bring in some money. My cent of perception ... Rudi Vansnick President - CEO ——————————————— Internet Society Belgium ————————————————— President - CEO Tel +32/(0)9/329.39.16 rudi.vansnick@isoc.be Mobile +32/(0)475/28.16.32 Dendermondesteenweg 143 B-9070 Destelbergen BELGIUM www.internetsociety.be "The Internet is for everyone" ——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— Op 10-nov-2011, om 22:51 heeft Carlton Samuels het volgende geschreven:
+1 to Karl. .... we do have some of those 'broad principles' on the road. What might be shaping up here is the convergence - of a kind - between the notion of a ccTLD and the efficacy of geographic names in a gTLD setting. We're seeing a manifestation of the struggle to have universal acceptance of those principles. [The issue of colonial territories with designated ccTLD is part of this as well; think Las Malvinas/Falkland Islands. Even if 'new' ones are articulated around this issue, the struggle will continue.
Evan noted that contrary objectives are sometimes responsible for fueling these arguments, meaning they will remain unencumbered by these 'broad principles'. This is a indirect recognition of the politics of things.
Can't escape the politics. And ICANN - no better or worse than any institution so situated - will respond to it in some way, shape or form.
- Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote:
Be wary ... There is a similarity between the relationship of Wales (or Scotland, etc) to the UK as there is in the relationship of California (or Texas, etc) to the United States.
The argument that supports a TLD for Wales would also argue for a TLD for California.
And the same would hold for any division of any federalized national structure with a two-tier division of sovereignty.
Before advocating these kinds of things it would be wise to come up with some sort of principle that could be used to separate those cases that one would accept and ones that one would reject.
For instance, should there be a TLD for Aquitaine? (Probably not, but we do already have one for Catalonia.)
Without an articulation of broadly accepted principles to guide the choices this process will end up in chaos.
--karl--
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
On 10 November 2011 15:42, Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote: The argument that supports a TLD for Wales would also argue for a TLD for
California.
Sorry, but that comparison is almost absurd. - California doesn't have its own distinct language, unique to it and shared by no other jurisdiction, such that proponents fear it's being driven to extinction (there's more justification for .cymru than .wales) - California doesn't have a vibrant political party, with members elected to Congress as well as local legislature, openly and aggressively advocating for its secession from the Union - California has a legislature with the authority to levy taxes.
And the same would hold for any division of any federalized national structure with a two-tier division of sovereignty.
Well, at least any national structure considered independent enough to have its own entries in international events such as the Commonwealth Games<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wales_at_the_Commonwealth_Games>or the FIFA World Cup <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wales_national_football_team>. In any case, as I said before.... in its current state, ".wales" is Just Another GeoTLD. If the Welsh Nationalists have their way, it would qualify for a ccTLD. And while comparisons with California might be ludicrous. I might be more inclined to consider other US states <http://texasnationalist.com/> for contrast
For instance, should there be a TLD for Aquitaine? (Probably not, but we do already have one for Catalonia.)
By ICANN's metric, anyone with the cash and the credibility can pony up the cash and ask for .aquetaine ... or .quebec ... or .kashmir ... or any other string. There's a policy in place about getting TLD names based on geographic locations. And, of course, the objection process. Without an articulation of broadly accepted principles to guide the choices
this process will end up in chaos.
What you have ... all that you have ... is in the applicant guidebook. If that's not enough.... Until now ICANN has been obsessed with creating the gTLD program. Soon enough on we can probably expect to see it obsess with cleaning up all the unintended consequences of that program (and maybe even some of the intended ones!) - Evan
On 11/10/2011 02:31 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
The argument that supports a TLD for Wales would also argue for a TLD for
California.
Sorry, but that comparison is almost absurd.
I am glad you put in the word "almost" because my comparison is most certainly not absurd. On a comparative scale it certainly it is no more absurd than an argument that attempts to justify a TLD based on an entry in wikipedia about a sporting event. Did you know that California, which like Texas had a degree of pre-existing sovereignty, came into the US via the same war and events that brought in Texas? So what principle do you articulate that supports your inclination to accept the legitimacy of Texas for a TLD but not California? What about Hawaii? They have their own linguistic identity and there are those there who would like to undo what was done to them when they were dragged into the US sphere. And Utah - The religious immigrants to that region have an amazing history, much of which involved trying to escape persecution and avoid becoming part of the United States. In your defense you did, perhaps unknowingly, put forth some proto-principles which seem to articulate a desire for a TLD for groups of people who are politically isolated, with a linquistic identity, and under a degree of asserted subjugation. (However, I don't see why taxing authority, or lack of, is relevant.) Branching out from the US - How does Quebec fit? It certainly has linguistic differences with the rest of Canada (and having learned French in Montreal I long ago learned that what is spoken there is a rather unique version of that language), but it has taxing authority and elects members to the Canadian parliament. So on that one your principles would deny a TLD for Quebec. That would sadden a lot of people who live there. Under your proposed principles it would seem that we ought to have either .eu or the collection of .uk, .de, .fr, .es etc, but not both. By-the-way, it is easy to find groups that meet your definition, even here in California. For instance, there is the town of Boonville, California. It has its own unique, and dying, language. It has no political power. People there have expressed a desire to have their own sovereignty. So why not .boon? And on the other hand, there have been several proposals over the year to carve California (Alta and Baja), Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and Hawaii off into a new country. But the chances of that, at least since the 1860's, are somewhat remote. The larger question is, of course, what does any of this have to do with the technical stability of the internet, which is what ICANN was created to do. I know that all of us like to have bigger play pens. But the result is an ICANN that is a quasi-government that is growing and growing without bounds and which has constraints on the exercise of its powers that are have forgotten the entire notions of limits and accountability that were envisioned in the late 18th century and which form the basis for many modern Constitutional structures.
By ICANN's metric, anyone with the cash and the credibility can pony up the cash and ask for .aquetaine ... or .quebec ... or .kashmir ... or any other string. There's a policy in place about getting TLD names based on geographic locations. And, of course, the objection process.
Notice that word "cash" - and notice that you have added "credibility". In other words, you are saying pretty clearly that under the lex-ICANNia that national identities are up for sale ... but only at the price that ICANN sets and only if in ICANN's subjective judgment you are worthy (credible).
Without an articulation of broadly accepted principles to guide the choices
this process will end up in chaos.
What you have ... all that you have ... is in the applicant guidebook. If that's not enough....
I've read it. By weight, it is more than enough. By content it is essentially a set of social and economic engineering rules that are designed to protect Verisign and the trademark industry (of which I am a dues-paying member). --karl--
On 10 Nov 2011, at 20:42, Karl Auerbach wrote:
Be wary ... There is a similarity between the relationship of Wales (or Scotland, etc) to the UK as there is in the relationship of California (or Texas, etc) to the United States.
The argument that supports a TLD for Wales would also argue for a TLD for California.
And the same would hold for any division of any federalized national structure with a two-tier division of sovereignty.
Before advocating these kinds of things it would be wise to come up with some sort of principle that could be used to separate those cases that one would accept and ones that one would reject.
For instance, should there be a TLD for Aquitaine? (Probably not, but we do already have one for Catalonia.)
There's a project group for a .aquitaine already - they were in Dakar Does California have a unique cultural and / or linguistic identity? Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions ♞ Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection ICANN Accredited Registrar http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.biz http://mneylon.tel Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Facebook: http://fb.me/blacknight Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
On 11/14/2011 09:08 AM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
Does California have a unique cultural and / or linguistic identity?
Yes. In 1510 California was described thus:
Know, that on the right hand of the Indies there is an island called California very close to the side of the Terrestrial Paradise; and it is peopled by black women, without any man among them, for they live in the manner of Amazons.
With minor adjustments - for instance we have men these days - that certainly defines California. BTW, I find the "unique cultural and/or linquistic identity" to be a rather contrived, and arguably self-serving, formula. There is probably at least as much social gluten among those who play World of Warcraft - a group that definitely has their own language and culture - as there is among the residents of the area once called Aquitaine. --karl--
While Karl gives an accurate recall of the early European definition of California, then they might've just labeled the map 'here be dragons', as was the usual case in recording ignorance. Here's another thing. Speaking of the assertion "peopled by black women", Ivan van Sertima - Professor [Emeritus] of History at Princeton and a Caribbean man; just one of the brilliant sons of Guyana - in his "They Came Before Colombus: The African Presence in Ancient America" asserts and provides considerable evidence of an African presence long before the European one of the 15th Century. My own teacher and mentor, Professor Rex Nettleford [if heaven exist may he get there before the devil knows he's dead] from the high perch at the UN HQ in NY characterised Don Cristobal Colon, Admiral of the Ocean Sea, thus 'that Genoan wanderer'...... Context is important to understanding, y'see. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote:
Know, that on the right hand of the Indies there is an island called
California very close to the side of the Terrestrial Paradise;
Interesting part of the article: "Costs Nominet suggests one solution would be for the both name to be registered. Website addresses ending in either suffix could then direct users to the same place. However, ICANN is charging $185,000 (£116,045) per application and is refusing to let Wales be a special case. The Welsh business minister, Edwina Hart, said last week that she is not considering paying for either application." Minister Hart is a member of the National Assembly for Wales, not for UK parliamentary seat, not an MP and not a minister in David Cameron's government, not with a voice in the GAC, but she through the National Assembly for Wales has some powers to make policy for Wales... confused? I know I am! Perhaps all become clear when the applications process opens. Adam On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin@ttcsweb.org> wrote:
"A survey of Welsh businesses and consumers suggests a majority of both support the nation getting its own domain name. The move would offer website owners the chance to end their address with .wales and .cymru, instead of .uk.
Internet regulator ICANN will allow countries and other organisations to apply for the new names from January.
Supporters say it could help with branding, but critics warn it may increase the opportunity for fraud. The poll was commissioned by the not-for-profit domain registry service Nominet. It suggests 69% of consumers backed the move and 59% of Welsh businesses and other bodies.
The poll used a sample of 1,003 individuals - 21% of whom were Welsh speakers - and 250 senior decision makers in Welsh organisations However the survey suggested splits over which name to take."
Read rest of article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15658689 _______________________________________________ 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
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
However, ICANN is charging $185,000 (£116,045) per application and is refusing to let Wales be a special case.
ICANN can veto JAS in advance? Not that I think they would qualify. j
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
participants (9)
-
Adam Peake -
Carlton Samuels -
Dev Anand Teelucksingh -
Evan Leibovitch -
John R. Levine -
Joly MacFie -
Karl Auerbach -
Michele Neylon :: Blacknight -
Rudi Vansnick