<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Very useful Sam, thx!<br>
<br>
Nicolas<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/03/2015 2:19 PM, Sam Lanfranco
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:55071EA8.4050807@yorku.ca" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Nicolas, et. al.,<br>
<br>
From an economists vantage point there is an interesting wrinkle
here. Domain names are (ARE) property once one owns them (or
rather has a lease on them) and as property they can become
subject to what a municipality would call zoning regulations,
i.e., two of them might look alike but there are different
regulations as to how they can be used. The registries are just
beginning to figure out that whereas municipal zoning
regulations depend on some democratic process and
accountability, domain name zoning regulations are completely up
to the registry and are another cash cow. The .sucks registry is
a case in point. <br>
<br>
The .sucks registry is offering a "Consumer Advocate" subsidized
price, reserved apparently specifically for individuals and not
for civil society groups or not-for-profit organizations. The
price looks reasonable at $9.95 per domain. They will be for
purchase in September. But, big BUT, such domains cannot point
to an owner's own website. The can only be used to redirect
traffic for that domain to a discussion forum on the
everything.sucks website (free or for a fee?). Here "use zoning'
includes the redirect and who knows what restrictions .sucks
might decide to place on what is posted to everything.sucks, who
controls that, or whether this will eventually involve
additional fees. There will apparently be a standard price of
$249 for a domain name that does not involves these
restrictions. <br>
<br>
Apart from this specific case, I would expect registrars to
exploit both their ability to ration names and segment markets,
and discover more and more ways to subject domain names to
"zoning restrictions", usually in the name of profits, and
probably frequently clothed in the language of liability. If
there is falling marginal revenue from the extensive margin
(more gtld's) there is still money to be made from the intensive
margin, from segmenting the domain name markets within a gTLD.<br>
<br>
Sam L. . <br>
<br>
<br>
On 16/03/2015 1:32 PM, Nicolas Adam wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:550713B3.7070709@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Let's say one critic waits out a brand owner's first few moves
to buy some of the obvious names with which they are afraid to
be criticized with (which is not something I would do right off
the bat if I was on of them, mind you, and even if i would be
inclined to do it I'd wait for the price to go way down), does
anybody know if the critics will be able to know the price he
will end up paying <b>before</b> he divulge to the .sucks team
what is the string he covets?<br>
<br>
For example, let's say McDonald.sucks is registered by the fast
food chain. Do you guys think that the critic will be able to
buy thatyellowandredclown.sucks for an eventually
specified/advertised price for various alphanumeric strings
under .sucks or do you guys think the .sucks strategic pricing
will be able to look at his string request and put forth a
specific price for the string?<br>
<br>
Please forgive my ignorance of those domaining details.<br>
<br>
Nicolas<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>