Alexander Schubert: Many thanks for the nice response. A more liquid market could bring more money into domain names, boosting overall fortunes. For example: #1. A Radio Test on the Domain Name : Can a listener catch the domain name on hearing it? #2. Choice of TLD Looking for references to Promote Liquidity in the relatively illiquid domain name segment. I will keep looking for references with ICANN first and wait for any further advise. Olivier: I have seen your other mail. I will watch the video you have referred to ASAP and get back. Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of alexander--- via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 27 September 2023 19:48 To: 'CPWG CPWG' <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Hi, In what way has “the lack of liquidity has been a challenge for domain owners”? The proposed “Tokenization”: a tool for crypto-themed gTLDs like .crypto or for any new gTLD (like .weed, .cannabis or .anything)? Why would the Tokenization have to be introduced by ICANN – why not by other means? A domain has a registrant – the registrant would have to be a legal entity – it’s ownership could be organized in whatever way you want. How have ICANN, the registry, or the registrar to be involved in such scheme? “… valuable asset for nearly 50 years”? Monetary-wise? No. For less than 30 years. Monetary value implies that the asset is used in commerce. Until 1994 it was prohibited to use the Internet for commercial purposes. No commercial use – no monetary value. Plus: in 1994 the “value” of a domain name was basically inexistant. Nobody paid ransom for a domain name held hostage by a domain grabber. Danke, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Alexander Schubert ___________________________________ Alexander Schubert LinkedIn.com/in/alexanderschubert U.S. +1(202)684-6806 Germany +49(030)8643-7863 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of gopal via CPWG Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2023 3:59 PM To: CPWG CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Dear All, Domain names have been a valuable asset for nearly 50 years. However, the lack of liquidity has been a challenge for domain owners. Tokenization could provide a solution to this liquidity issue. By tokenizing domain assets, owners can sell off interests in their domains, building liquidity from assets that would otherwise remain idle. Need advise on ICANN Remit pertaining to new crypto-themed top-level domains which could potentially increase the value and liquidity of domain assets. As a matter of fact, IDN can very well serve as a crypt of a tokenized domain name. Please advise. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks Oliver. The link you have sent is a "MUST WATCH" ICANN Official discussion on the subject. .COM becoming "doubt"COM is now a hackneyed point. Does the same point extend to ".<place names taken up with National Pride>" ? ccTLDs used to help manage such concerns due to different classification as TLDs. A grey area is emerging. Your thoughts.. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Sent: 27 September 2023 19:51 To: gopal <gopal@annauniv.edu>; CPWG CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Dear Gopal, have you watched this? Blockchain, NFT's, and Decentralized Domains - What is the impact on end-users, internet security… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwMfefTH9Yc Kindest regards, Olivier On 27/09/2023 13:59, gopal via CPWG wrote: Dear All, Domain names have been a valuable asset for nearly 50 years. However, the lack of liquidity has been a challenge for domain owners. Tokenization could provide a solution to this liquidity issue. By tokenizing domain assets, owners can sell off interests in their domains, building liquidity from assets that would otherwise remain idle. Need advise on ICANN Remit pertaining to new crypto-themed top-level domains which could potentially increase the value and liquidity of domain assets. As a matter of fact, IDN can very well serve as a crypt of a tokenized domain name. Please advise. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

Sorry, didn't get the original email, just John's reply ... and maybe I know why ;-). On 27/09/2023 13:59, gopal via CPWG wrote:

...

Domain names have been a valuable asset for nearly 50 years. However, the lack of liquidity has been a challenge for domain owners.

This might just be the most ludicrous statement I have encountered since first becoming involved with ICANN, and that's the better part of 20 years. Domain names are extremely liquid, especially for an entire industry that trades them as commodities. For those who genuinely use domains for their brand or Internet presence, the domain then generally becomes as liquid as the brand it's attached to. But generally there are no legal or contractual restrictions limiting one's ability to transfer a domain at any time (beyond the industry- or country-specific bounds of the TLD, which the buyer should have known at the time of purchase). The identified challenge, rather, is the DEMAND for resale domains. It's easy for domain speculators to convince themselves their inventory is worth more than the market will pay. If you have to lower the price to below what you paid, welcome to the wonderful world of speculation. Maybe you would be better off putting your money in Chinese real estate. But that's not the same as saying that domain owners are actually prevented from selling on short notice. The "tokenizing' scheme proposed -- giving speculators the ability to offload the risk/reward of overvalued domains -- offers all the appeal and logic of NFTs, and likely the same longevity. But hey, knock yourself out. Maybe there's someone out there that may think this is worthwhile; there's one born every minute, as the saying goes. Meanwhile I have no idea why or how the emergence of new "crypto-themed" TLDs will increase the value of the existing domain pool. Sounds like magical thinking to me. In any case -- why is this being asked of At-Large? - Evan

Hi Roberto, “just the liquidity issue itself.” There is no “issue” at all. Not for the Internet User – not for the legitimate domain owner. A domain registration is to route users to a website or route emails. No “liquidity” needed. The only people on this planet who have a “liquidity” problem with domains are those who hold domains hostage for ransom: these people have a budget and invest their budget into domain registrations. Once the budget is used up – they can’t invest anymore. They also can’t simply sell any of their domains – because who wants to by “cochapella.com” at gun point? Nobody – but a future fashion brand, a future restaurant or maybe a music festival? You register the domain today – and in 10 years someone wakes up with the idea for that brand – and needs your domain. It is an “asset” only in so far, as in the far future maybe someone needs it for a legitimate business. The tokenization idea is now to say that the owner of the domain may sell “virtual shares” of it – thus already recoups some of his invested funds – in order to grab even more domains. In other words: Any system or tool that would reduce the “pain” of “liquidity”-absence would lead to even MORE domains held hostage for ransom. That would mean: legitimate domain users have less unregistered domains to chose from. And the Internet user will see more trucks with domain monsters like www.BocaRaton-Pool-Maintainance-24-7.net <http://www.BocaRaton-Pool-Maintainance-24-7.net> – because anything that makes remotely sense was already taken and the owners are asking moon prices for their loot. Enabling more liquidity enriches speculators – and causes grand damage for everybody else. Now the simple question is: Does ICANN serve “everybody else” – or domain scalpers? IDK. But I would hope that the public interest is in the foreground. Or should be. In my mind. Where does everybody else stand in this matter? Danke, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Alexander Schubert ___________________________________ Alexander Schubert LinkedIn.com/in/alexanderschubert U.S. +1(202)684-6806 Germany +49(030)8643-7863 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano via CPWG Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 4:42 AM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Hi all In any case -- why is this being asked of At-Large? I am travelling and do not always have the opportunity to join, so I have regretfully missing the last call, so I might not be correctly informed. However, one thing I can say is that the issue of lack of liquidity of domain owners is not high on my agenda, to say the least. I see from Evan’s message that I am not alone, but can somebody in few words explain me why I may be wrong and I should worry? I don’t mean worry about crypto currencies or other things, that is something that will happen anyway regardless domain owners liquidity, and incidentally will affect more than just the domain name market, but just the liquidity issue itself. Thanks, Roberto

Dear Dr. Gopal, you are literally peddling domain scalping. But you aren’t preaching to the choir in this group. At NamesCon (a domainers conference) you would. The third link „Busting Domain Name Secondary Market Myths” by my very good, personal friend Zak is a good example: it entirely pertains to LEGACY TLDs such as .com and .de: these have “quasi-monopolies”. In Germany for example you are literally forced (by the market and user behavior) to have a .de domain. Even one of the most “American” brands on the planet (one of the few U.S. made cars that manages to get sold in Germany) saw itself forced to use jeep.de – instead of jeep.com/de or something. In Germany you MUST use “.de” – or you look entirely stupid. That amounts to a “monopoly”. In monopolistic name spaces such as .com or .de the rules are different: they already HAVE ample brand awareness. When a small percentage of domains is held hostage for ransom: it doesn’t hurt the TLD brand itself. Regarding any proposed “tokenization”: The legacy TLD namespaces are all established – nothing will change there. We are obviously talking here about future, new gTLD namespaces. And there you can throw all the legacy TLD rules into the trash bin – because when starting out, a new gTLD namespace has a gTLD brand awareness of literally “zero”: neither prospective registrants (not domainers, real registrants that use the domain for real websites that provide actual benefit to the user: not “parked sites”) nor the Internet user know about the gTLD. And mass grabbing of its new namespace is a severe problem that “kills” that gTLD brand. I try to explain this problem via a real-life example: This is the base problem Dubai faced back in the 1960s: they started out as a "void". Just sand and a few roads and big dreams. They started to sell their land to builders – expecting them to BUILD something that enhances the Dubai brand. Imagine Dubai had been a freshly minted new gTLD such as .info? People had seen the "Dubai vision" - and had bought all the premium property (land): just like in .info (at times there where some 7 Million .info domains registered). But what then? Almost none of the "property" (in a gTLD: domains) suitable for business, leisure, hotels, restaurants, apartments, work spaces etc would have been utilized for the intended use: they would have just laid there abandoned. Who then would have wanted to visit Dubai? To make business there? What would have served as "ambassador" for Dubai? Dubai had been the same void of empty sand: just now owned by many investors. And that's what happened first to .info in 2001, then to almost all new gTLDs in the 2012 round: All premium space (generic keywords, 1, 2 and 3 letters versions, etc) snooped up by "domain investors, rendering the brand new gTLD brand ".info" void of any "brand ambassadors" with impact. A Dubai where all hotels, bars, restaurants, malls, etc have not yet been built, no apartments or office space is for lease - because the property owners haven't built buildings (just have all billboards erected with advertising). Dubai solved the problem elegantly: You only got a property when you promised to build something useful. Like a hotel, apartment building, office building, etc. If you defaulted - your property was taken from you. As a result Dubai quickly evolved to the shining, rising star with all its attractions of today! A "managed space". .info in opposite was unmanaged - and way too cheap. All land was taken by people who never used it. Either for speculative or defensive reasons. An empty void – hostile – nothing to see – unknown to the general public – no gTLD brand ambassadors (websites with an impact) existing. In new gTLD namespaces the mass-grabbing of all generic namespace results in a catastrophe: that gTLD brand is only being promoted by domains that are visible and cerate real benefit for the Internet user. If all generic names are held by speculators – who then shall promote the TLD brand? I mean: promote the brand to the common Internet user? It’s a Dubai where ALL the land is owned by speculators – and not used for anything. On top: most domainers won’t even sell their loot for 5 to 10 years in a new gTLD – they are “waiting” that “others” create brand awareness for the gTLD brand. “Domainers” are very proud about their business. We could start to argue about their value contribution in legacy spaces. In some cases, their activities might be inevitable. In many cases not. Example: someone reads in the news that a University started a non-profit project named “something cool” (placeholder). Then a domainer quickly registers “somethingcool.com” – hoping that the project will become a for profit spinout. Now a few months later the spinout is being formed – and ransom has to be paid for that domain. There is hardly ANY “contribution” by the “domain investor” here. It’s just plain old highway robbery. Do you support such activity? In new gTLDs mass domain-grabbing is the death dagger for that entire namespace. Btw: Domains are commercially viable since 1994/1995 – 28 to 29 years. And no: in February 1986 nobody could waltz into Jon Postel’s office and “register” a .com domain. By Feb 1986 only 8 .com domains were registered in total: hand selected for 8 members of the DARPA project, such as Xerox or Northrop. .com domains became easily accessible to the greater public only by 1995 – before that time it was very tedious to get a .com, and you were supposed to own only ONE .com domain per person. Guess why? To prevent grabbing! Domains are a “commercial asset” for less than 30 years. In the infant years the TLD space was at least to a degree “protected”. By the time it opened the floodgates it already had all the necessary gTLD brand awareness. That’s the main differentiator between the evolvement of .com or .de – and the failure of for example .info: Many domains registered – zero brand awareness – zero real life impact – nothing there for the Internet user. .info had the chance to be what .net or .org are now. It could have been a real .com-hunter. Instead, it is a Dubai without any development: just sand and a few roads. And lot’s of sold property – undeveloped. And many, many “for sale” signs and billboards. Hurra! The effort to extend the DNS in the future is not the right place for “asset tokenization” to “enhance liquidity”. Do that in .token or .crypto. Not in .weed or .chicago. Danke, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Alexander Schubert ___________________________________ Alexander Schubert LinkedIn.com/in/alexanderschubert U.S. +1(202)684-6806 Germany +49(030)8643-7863 From: gopal <gopal@annauniv.edu> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 12:27 PM To: 'CPWG' <cpwg@icann.org>; alexander@schubert.berlin; b_jouris@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Further to the mail in the trace and a separate mail from Bill Jouris: Thank you again for the nice replies. I am taking the liberty of including the following links to discussions on this thread: #1: Domain Name Liquidity: What is It, Where Was It, Where Will It Be? <https://www.domainsherpa.com/dnseattle-2016/#video> https://www.domainsherpa.com/dnseattle-2016/#video DNSeattle took place on Thursday, May 12, 2016 at GoDaddy’s headquarters in Kirkland, Washington #2: [My Choice MOST USEFUL] Brief History of the Domain Name System https://cyber.harvard.edu/icann/pressingissues2000/briefingbook/dnshistory.h tml #3: <https://circleid.com/posts/20210218-busting-domain-name-secondary-market-my ths> Busting Domain Name Secondary Market Myths <https://circleid.com/posts/20210218-busting-domain-name-secondary-market-my ths/?fbclid=IwAR1R6ct8o34aynmu3VgvTVN9sKI0hefdDpSkWbvvy2SseYpqNXv-_Hzb05o> https://circleid.com/posts/20210218-busting-domain-name-secondary-market-myt hs/?fbclid=IwAR1R6ct8o34aynmu3VgvTVN9sKI0hefdDpSkWbvvy2SseYpqNXv-_Hzb05o #4: Liquidity is a trade-off between the price at which an asset can be sold, and how quickly it can be sold. Is the subject line of this mail thread a Web3 Issue? Are domain names a liquid asset? at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop <https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=o3wyP2vApU0> &v=o3wyP2vApU0 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=o3wyP2vApU0> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=o3wyP2vApU0> Are domain names a liquid asset? https://chriszuiker.com/surveyAre domain names a liquid asset?The best domains have more liquidity and will always be in demand. If you have a lower level d... www.youtube.com Your thoughts... Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 <https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545> https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 <https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli> https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _____ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of alexander--- via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 28 September 2023 14:11 To: 'CPWG' <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Hi Roberto, “just the liquidity issue itself.” There is no “issue” at all. Not for the Internet User – not for the legitimate domain owner. A domain registration is to route users to a website or route emails. No “liquidity” needed. The only people on this planet who have a “liquidity” problem with domains are those who hold domains hostage for ransom: these people have a budget and invest their budget into domain registrations. Once the budget is used up – they can’t invest anymore. They also can’t simply sell any of their domains – because who wants to by “cochapella.com” at gun point? Nobody – but a future fashion brand, a future restaurant or maybe a music festival? You register the domain today – and in 10 years someone wakes up with the idea for that brand – and needs your domain. It is an “asset” only in so far, as in the far future maybe someone needs it for a legitimate business. The tokenization idea is now to say that the owner of the domain may sell “virtual shares” of it – thus already recoups some of his invested funds – in order to grab even more domains. In other words: Any system or tool that would reduce the “pain” of “liquidity”-absence would lead to even MORE domains held hostage for ransom. That would mean: legitimate domain users have less unregistered domains to chose from. And the Internet user will see more trucks with domain monsters like www.BocaRaton-Pool-Maintainance-24-7.net <http://www.BocaRaton-Pool-Maintainance-24-7.net> – because anything that makes remotely sense was already taken and the owners are asking moon prices for their loot. Enabling more liquidity enriches speculators – and causes grand damage for everybody else. Now the simple question is: Does ICANN serve “everybody else” – or domain scalpers? IDK. But I would hope that the public interest is in the foreground. Or should be. In my mind. Where does everybody else stand in this matter? Danke, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Alexander Schubert ___________________________________ Alexander Schubert LinkedIn.com/in/alexanderschubert U.S. +1(202)684-6806 Germany +49(030)8643-7863 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano via CPWG Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 4:42 AM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Hi all In any case -- why is this being asked of At-Large? I am travelling and do not always have the opportunity to join, so I have regretfully missing the last call, so I might not be correctly informed. However, one thing I can say is that the issue of lack of liquidity of domain owners is not high on my agenda, to say the least. I see from Evan’s message that I am not alone, but can somebody in few words explain me why I may be wrong and I should worry? I don’t mean worry about crypto currencies or other things, that is something that will happen anyway regardless domain owners liquidity, and incidentally will affect more than just the domain name market, but just the liquidity issue itself. Thanks, Roberto

Hi John, Very well written, great! You are right, I might have not expressed myself clear enough: "Brand Ambassadors" can be split into classes - and not all must be premium ambassadors like mta.info (the official NYC public transportation authority website) or spain.info (Spain's official tourism website) but actually ANY .info domain that creates any measurable "visibility" for the gTLD brand of .info: via email, www or whatever. A domain (and the website it is routing to) doesn't create automatically TLD brand visibility - unless the domain is seen by others. And the .eu folks HAVE been warned: I remember at the Argentinian ICANN meeting I had a few of the top brass in my bus back to Buenos Aires - and I tried to explain exactly how their ccTLD will die in the dust - but they wouldn't even listen. Btw: Is it to late to get into the Sub-Pro IRT group? Danke, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Alexander Schubert ___________________________________ Alexander Schubert LinkedIn.com/in/alexanderschubert U.S. +1(202)684-6806 Germany +49(030)8643-7863 -----Original Message----- From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of John McCormac via CPWG Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 6:53 PM To: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names On 28/09/2023 12:44, alexander--- via CPWG wrote:

And that's what happened first to .info in 2001, then to almost all new gTLDs in the 2012 round:

The .INFO is where a some of the landrush mentality started, Alexander, Growth had stalled and the registry, Afilias, decided to give away free domain names. That almost doubled the size of the zone in a few weeks.

All premium space (generic keywords, 1, 2 and 3 letters versions, etc) snooped up by "domain investors, rendering the brand new gTLD brand ".info" void of any "brand ambassadors" with impact. A Dubai where all hotels, bars, restaurants, malls, etc have not yet been built, no apartments or office space is for lease - because the property owners haven't built buildings (just have all billboards erected with advertising).

There were some brand ambassadors for .INFO but the increase in the number of .INFO domain names created its own problems. There are also a few missing points in the timeline. When Google launched Adsense and the low cost of of .INFO worked to its advantage in that a lot of people set up micro-sites of a few webpages on a topic and put Adsense on those sites. The people who did this initially made money. Eventually, Google and other search engines deemphasised these .INFO websites in search results. The registry frequently ran discounting offers that reduced the registration fee. This created a boom and bust cycle. However, a small percentage of these discounted registrations renewed at full renewal fee. After the .EU fiasco (The European Commission was advised by people who were unaware of what what happening in the industry and selected an application from an applicant that had never run a large TLD active in multiple countries. It didn't turn out well and it killed .EU as an alternative to .COM in the European Union.), the next gTLD to launch was the .MOBI and this is where things really changed. Potentially high value domain names were reserved by the registry and auctioned off. The domainers effectively just got the crumbs from the table. The .MOBI was a great idea but the launch of the Apple iPhone, and the Android smartphones killed it. During that time, large-scale Domain Tasting (where registrars would register tens of millions of domain names in the legacy gTLDs, test them with PPC advertising, and drop those that did not make money within the five day Add Grace Period at no cost to themselves) was beginning to get out of control. That problem was solved with legal action, Google stopping monetising new registrations and ICANN eventually introducing a cost to the AGP deletions. That removed the artificial scarcity in the legacy gTLDs and people were able to register deleted domain names again. These effects combined stopped the development of .MOBI as a mainstream gTLD. The registry auctions model of high value generics was established by the .MOBI launch and .ASIA and .CO also used it. It made money for the registry and got publicity but the changing market conditions for the legacy gTLDs and ccTLDs on various markets would cause problems for some of the 2012 round gTLDs. Domain Tasting created a shift to the ccTLDs because people found they could get a domain name in their local ccTLD that was long gone in .COM/NET/ORG. That helped some ccTLDs, which had been struggling against the legacy gTLDs in their markets, begin to dominate their markets. In many countries, .COM was no longer king. The local ccTLD was the first choice TLD for new registrants. It was also a very different economic situation. With the first round of new gTLDs in the early 2000s, the Internet was much smaller and a lot of countries had no major presence. The growth of broadband and Internet access meant that more people were getting online and many were from countries that did not have strong economies. Some of the new gTLD registries held back the high value and short domain names for auction but this did not have a major effect for many of the new gTLDs. The problems for most new gTLDs were demand, marketing and timing. Large-scale Domain Tasting had created an artificial scarcity of domain names. In that artifical scarcity, a new round of gTLDs made a lot of commercial sense. Taking away that artifical scarcity switched a lot of the demand back to the legacy gTLDs and ccTLDs. The roll-out of the 2012 round wasn't helped by ICANN's launch strategy. There were too many new gTLDs rolling out in too short a time. That meant that newly launched gTLDs did not have a chance to establish themselves in the market before another gTLD was launched. That created confusion for potential registrants.

Dubai solved the problem elegantly:

Perhaps for Dubai but there is something missing when it comes to driving gTLD adoption. Brand ambassadors might be good in the launch phase of a TLD but it is the adoption by ordinary businesses and people that makes a gTLD a success. They are the ones that give a gTLD a bedrock of development. They, not the brand ambassadors, create a sense of community for the gTLD. A use it or lose it appoach (Dubai), is a potentially dangerous one for a gTLD because it takes time to build websites. And even if someone does not have a website, they may be using the domain name for e-mail. It can take up to three years before ordinary registrants make their hold'em or fold'em decision on a domain name in a new TLD.

In new gTLD namespaces the mass-grabbing of all generic namespace results in a catastrophe: that gTLD brand is only being promoted by domains that are visible and cerate real benefit for the Internet user.

This did not happen in all new gTLDs. Some of the Uniregistry gTLDs were good examples of it but other gTLDs did not have a large number of domain names taken out of circulation like that. What happened in some of the Uniregistry gTLDs was that the registry reserved a lot of domain names that would have been valuable in .COM using its own registrar. That killed growth and development in these gTLDs but the reason is not immediately obvious. There was no landrush in these gTLDs. Every new TLD aimed at the public has a landrush phase. This is where potential registrants try to register a "good" domain name. There is competition and it creates demand for the TLD. It lasts about six months and it is essential for a newly launched TLD. It is free advertising for the TLD. There is speculation but many of the highly speculative registrations will be deleted on the anniversary of the landrush (the Junk Dump). This landrush also sparks development in the TLD with small businesses and people developing websites on the TLD. This critical mass of development did not happen in many new gTLDs. Without a landrush, the registries had to invest a lot more in marketing. Some of them had competely underestimated the cost of marketing. What happened can be summed up like this: Less marketing results in lower visibility which results in fewer registrations which results in fewer websites.

If all generic names are held by speculators – who then shall promote the TLD brand? I mean: promote the brand to the common Internet user?

Generics are a distraction for a new TLD. Real promotion comes from usage. It is the people, the community, that builds websites on the TLD and uses it for e-mail that promote it. Forget the brand ambassadors. They are just background noise. It is the ordinary registrant who builds a website or uses the TLD for their e-mail address. It takes time. Focusing purely on the generic domain names is wrong because they effectively exclude themselves from the awareness of the ordinary users of a TLD. When people see their friends and the businesses they know using the TLD for everyday purposes, that's when things begin to change for the better for a TLD. The market for a TLD isn't just a set of numbers. It is people. Successful TLDs, especially the ccTLDs have the registrants identifying with the TLD as being *their* TLD.

It’s a Dubai where ALL the land is owned by speculators – and not used for anything. On top: most domainers won’t even sell their loot for 5 to 10 years in a new gTLD – they are “waiting” that “others” create brand awareness for the gTLD brand.

It is not a Dubai situation because the land in Dubai is not ultimately owned by the property developers. Registrants in successful TLDs have a sense of "ownership". The masterclass in disaster is the .EU ccTLD. What happened was almost exactly what you describe above and it wasn't helped by politicians and their situationally unaware advisors, and an understaffed registry. Those conditions combined to allowed the ccTLD to be plundered. It killed the ccTLD as an alternative to .COM in the European Union and the speculators lost millions and dumped most of their registrations within the following five years. The echo of the .EU landrush is still visible in the graphs for .EU seventeen years later. The .EU registry has worked hard to try to recover from the this disaster and the web usage rate is jst over half that of most real EU ccTLDs. (The CENTR methodology on attempting to measure web usage is not reliable.) It has also become a kind of truck-stop TLD where people go before being redirected to the registrant's primary website in another TLD. What happened to the .EU did not happen to most of the 2012 round new gTLDs. The .EU situation was one where the registrants decided the outcome. With some of the new gTLDs, it was the registries deciding to withhold the "valuable" domain names from the market that affected the outcome of their launches.

In new gTLDs mass domain-grabbing is the death dagger for that entire namespace.

It is not. Many new gTLDs were created with a "Field Of Dreams" attitude to marketing in that some registries thought if they launched it, the registrants would appear. They didn't. These registries competely underestimated the amount of marketing and time that is required to get a new gTLD established in the market.

of for example .info: Many domains registered – zero brand awareness – zero real life impact – nothing there for the Internet user. .info had the chance to be what .net or .org are now. It could have been a real .com-hunter. Instead, it is a Dubai without any development: just sand and a few roads. And lot’s of sold property – undeveloped. And many, many “for sale” signs and billboards. Hurra!

No. The .INFO had stalled before it added the free domain names. What stopped it being a .COM competitor was the bursting of the DotCOM bubble in 2000. At the time, most of the registrations in the legacy gTLDs were two year registrations and over the years 2000 to 2004, many of the domain names that had been registered in .COM were deleted as DotCOM bubble companies went bust and did not renew their domain names. This, combined with the launch of Google Adsense for domains, kicked off large-scale Domain Tasting. It is similar to the artificial scarcity problem created by large-scale Domain Tasting where "all of the good names are gone" panic took hold. Once these domain names (often previously registered by failed DotCOM bubble companies) became available for registration again, the prospects for .INFO were in trouble. It also killed the .PRO's plans. The .PRO registry thought its market was in the millions and ended up with only a few thousand registrations. That also happened with some of the 2012 new gTLDs. History, in the domain name business, does repeat. For every boom in the TLD markets there is a bust. The only things that change are the names and the bank balances of those who get it wrong. Perhaps that is the liquidity that really matters? Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com ********************************************************** -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

[ For some reason, the messages from Alexander to the list are not being forwarded to me, I only see them when someone responds.] Alexander wrote: The third link „Busting Domain Name Secondary Market Myths” by my very

good, personal friend Zak is a good example: it entirely pertains to LEGACY TLDs such as .com and .de: these have “quasi-monopolies”. In Germany for example you are literally forced (by the market and user behavior) to have a .de domain. Even one of the most “American” brands on the planet (one of the few U.S. made cars that manages to get sold in Germany) saw itself forced to use jeep.de – instead of jeep.com/de or something. In Germany you MUST use “.de” – or you look entirely stupid. That amounts to a “monopoly”.

I would say that this is a cultural exception rather than the rule. In my experience, in most other countries the local ccTLD struggles to compete with .com which is thought of more as an international TLD than an American one. (Who uses .us?) When the ccTLD is stronger than average it is as often as much of a language issue as a national one (ie. .de sites will be in German, .br will be in a variant of Portuguese).

Regarding any proposed “tokenization”: The legacy TLD namespaces are all established – nothing will change there. We are obviously talking here about future, new gTLD namespaces. And there you can throw all the legacy TLD rules into the trash bin – because when starting out, a new gTLD namespace has a gTLD brand awareness of literally “zero”: neither prospective registrants (not domainers, real registrants that use the domain for real websites that provide actual benefit to the user: not “parked sites”) nor the Internet user know about the gTLD. And mass grabbing of its new namespace is a severe problem that “kills” that gTLD brand.

I don't think most end-users care about TLD brands. It's a matter of function; either it forwards the user to the appropriate Internet destination or it doesn't. In fact I would say that most end-users don't care much about domains period, and they care less each day. How many people explicitly ask for " jeep.de" compared to just typing "jeep" in their browser? On mobile this is even more acute since keyboards are smaller and search can be done by voice. “Domainers” are very proud about their business. We could start to argue

about their value contribution in legacy spaces. In some cases, their activities might be inevitable. In many cases not. Example: someone reads in the news that a University started a non-profit project named “something cool” (placeholder). Then a domainer quickly registers “somethingcool.com” – hoping that the project will become a for profit spinout. Now a few months later the spinout is being formed – and ransom has to be paid for that domain. There is hardly ANY “contribution” by the “domain investor” here. It’s just plain old highway robbery. Do you support such activity?

There are usually options to circumvent the ransom; sometimes inelegant (like using a hyphen, something-cool.com), sometimes adding a word (ie, trysomethingcool.com) or sometimes using an oddball TLD (somethingcool.ngo). I've been involved in many startups and we've never had to go to the resale domain market. Sometimes the acquisition of an expensive resale domain is deliberate, to display that the company is so successful that it can waste money on a vanity domain (like transitioning from americanair.com to aa.com ). Given how much Internet is now found through search, clickable links, QR codes etc, the need for speculated "memorable" domains is not what it used to be. Plus (in my experience) there are fewer companies now that define their whole brand by their domain (ie, pets.com). If that means that entire inventories of grabbed domains remain unsold and losing money for speculators, no tears are shed. I find the desperate effort to spread the risk using tokens almost amusing. Once upon a time, stamp collections were considered so valuable that they were part of inheritance plans. Now, nobody cares. Demand for anything speculated can be volatile. - Evan

Thanks Gopal for the detailed list, but I still don’t see any reason why I should worry about the domain name owner lack of liquidity. Once we meet in person, possibly over a beer, I may ask you some details about regex = “^((?!-)[A-Za-z0-9-]{1, 63}(?<!-)\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2, 6}$” - although I suspect it will take me more than just one beer to fully understand it. Cheers, R. On 28.09.2023, at 12:56, gopal via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: John, Evan, Roberto, Thank you for the spirited response & time. Here are my quick notes to some of the concerns. I ran into this concern during my research on DNS with a specific focus on IDNs. #1. Domain names first came to use in through the Domain Name System in 1983, with general public registration not being available until February 24, 1986. Hence I opt to get the number 50 years in the mail. I rhymes well with ICANN @ 25 Years. #2. At-Large is the community of individual Internet users who participate in the policy development work of ICANN. At-Large Structure is nice provision to get the granularity necessary to represent certain concerns of Individual Internet Users. I am opting to use my own words in this context rather that quoting some very good ICANN Documents. #3. In India, Domain Name is an intangible asset. This may be true in many other countries as well. By classification in this manner there is nothing 'physical' in nature with the Domain Name per se. However, this classification lists Domain Names along with non-compete agreements, customer lists, goodwill, and corporate intellectual property such as patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. Domain Name is not an IP !! Later on I can pick up my notes on some of the discussions on these matters in ICANN meetings. There have been many grey areas and I am trying to do some study on this. To what extent can one consider a domain name [an intangible asset] to be an asset vs. liability? #4: Domainer and Domaining [emerging terms] Domaining, or the buying and selling of domain names much like in the case of "Real Estate". There are many software tools such as Domain name generators, Domain name marketplaces, Domain name management tools and Domain name appraisal tools.... <TECHNICAL OPEN> It is easy to have a notation of Regular Expression for Domain Name for the purpose of Software as given below. regex = “^((?!-)[A-Za-z0-9-]{1, 63}(?<!-)\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2, 6}$” The power of formalism comes in handy and dealing at a higher level of granularity makes the exercise optimal. <TECHNICAL CLOSE.> Generically there are so many applications now. The top three aspects for my research are: e-commerce, mobile apps & social media, TLDs [the new ones make the work lively]. $5: Liquidity of Domain Names [Thanks to John for some quantitative data that I will get back to later; I am sorry I am not able include separate mails in the same thread on this list] Domain names are considered “liquid,” meaning they can be converted into cash quickly with a generally-accepted floor value. Good Domain Names are always "Liquid" at a steep discount from the retail price. Quantitative Data from my Notes: Out of over 300 million registered domains, only 0.5-1% have some sort of reasonably quantifiable wholesale value. Do the ones in a given basket help in bad times? Reference: Domain Name Liquidity: What is It, Where Was It, Where Will It Be? This was a Panel Discussion during the DNSeattle that took place on Thursday, May 12, 2016 at GoDaddy’s headquarters in Kirkland, Washington. Your thoughts.... Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli PS: Olivier: I need more time to get back on the blockchain realted concerns ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: 28 September 2023 02:10 To: John McCormac <jmcc@hosterstats.com<mailto:jmcc@hosterstats.com>> Cc: cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org> <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Need Advise: Tokenization of Domain Names Sorry, didn't get the original email, just John's reply ... and maybe I know why ;-). On 27/09/2023 13:59, gopal via CPWG wrote:

Domain names have been a valuable asset for nearly 50 years. However, the lack of liquidity has been a challenge for domain owners.

This might just be the most ludicrous statement I have encountered since first becoming involved with ICANN, and that's the better part of 20 years. Domain names are extremely liquid, especially for an entire industry that trades them as commodities. For those who genuinely use domains for their brand or Internet presence, the domain then generally becomes as liquid as the brand it's attached to. But generally there are no legal or contractual restrictions limiting one's ability to transfer a domain at any time (beyond the industry- or country-specific bounds of the TLD, which the buyer should have known at the time of purchase). The identified challenge, rather, is the DEMAND for resale domains. It's easy for domain speculators to convince themselves their inventory is worth more than the market will pay. If you have to lower the price to below what you paid, welcome to the wonderful world of speculation. Maybe you would be better off putting your money in Chinese real estate. But that's not the same as saying that domain owners are actually prevented from selling on short notice. The "tokenizing' scheme proposed -- giving speculators the ability to offload the risk/reward of overvalued domains -- offers all the appeal and logic of NFTs, and likely the same longevity. But hey, knock yourself out. Maybe there's someone out there that may think this is worthwhile; there's one born every minute, as the saying goes. Meanwhile I have no idea why or how the emergence of new "crypto-themed" TLDs will increase the value of the existing domain pool. Sounds like magical thinking to me. In any case -- why is this being asked of At-Large? - Evan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.