Re: [wg-c] .com vs. ccTLDs in Europe

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

Kent Crispin wrote:

> Despite NSI's dreams to the
> contrary, the explosive growth of the net was not driven by the
> availability of domain names.

Another typically fact-free assertion. The expansion of commercial and
private (non-educational) http:// -based Internet content could not have
happened had there not been a way to get domain names quickly and easily
and cheaply. Try setting up a web site without one. (Sure it can be
done--but no one does it. Think there's a reason?)

> Also: arguably, if registrations in
> .com, .net, and .org had been much more restricted, there would have
> been growth in private third level domain registries.  Such a
> development would have been far healthier.

By "healthier" Kent means - register where central authorities want you
to register. that paradigm, like coffee, stunts your growth. We know
this. Just compare dot US and dot FR with com net and org.

Some people have a big problem with letting consumers decide things for
themselves. Given the structure of the DNS, a third-level domain means
that your name and your policies are subordinate to whoever controls the
second level. It also may mean that your visibility is limited. Recall
that the browsers filled in "www" and ".com" for you starting in the mid
90s, so that newbies who came on the web could just type a name and go
that that domain. Third level domains are longer, and make less of a
statement on a billboard etc. Any fool knows this. It is sheer hypocrisy
for the same people who want to give trademark holders inalienable
claims on second-level character strings to suddenly downplay the
significance and importance of SLDs when their accessibility to ordinary
users is at issue.