TIL that the
-
TIL that the .author top level domain exists, and no-one can buy it.
That means someone paid ~$227,000 USD + whatever the annual feed to keep a top level domain going is in order to make a tld that would, theoretically be used by a group of notoriously underpaid / unpaid people
and has just… sat on it.
You could have my-name.author but no, whoever made the tld doesn't feel like letting you.
dafuk is wrong with people? And how long has someone been sitting on this tld?
-
TIL that the .author top level domain exists, and no-one can buy it.
That means someone paid ~$227,000 USD + whatever the annual feed to keep a top level domain going is in order to make a tld that would, theoretically be used by a group of notoriously underpaid / unpaid people
and has just… sat on it.
You could have my-name.author but no, whoever made the tld doesn't feel like letting you.
dafuk is wrong with people? And how long has someone been sitting on this tld?
turns out, in addition to owning the .author top level domain, amazon owns .book
They bought it for $10M USD in 2014. The Association of American Publishers (AAP), and others opposed their bid because it would be against the public interest.
Amazon asserted "all domains in the .book registry will remain the property of Amazon," and that "there will be no resellers in .book and there will be no market in .book domains."
🧵 1/2
-
turns out, in addition to owning the .author top level domain, amazon owns .book
They bought it for $10M USD in 2014. The Association of American Publishers (AAP), and others opposed their bid because it would be against the public interest.
Amazon asserted "all domains in the .book registry will remain the property of Amazon," and that "there will be no resellers in .book and there will be no market in .book domains."
🧵 1/2
Amazon later softened the language, presumably in order to actually be allowed to buy it, but it didn't effing matter because 11 years later you still can't buy a .book domain.
I've never seen a .book domain used by Amazon either, and you don't need to buy a TLD for your internal network. You can call internal boxes whatever you want. So, they're probably just sitting on it like a-holes.
Publishers Weekly article from 2014 when they bought it: https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/bookselling/article/64762-amazon-book-and-the-new-top-level-domain-names.html
🧵 2/2
-
Amazon later softened the language, presumably in order to actually be allowed to buy it, but it didn't effing matter because 11 years later you still can't buy a .book domain.
I've never seen a .book domain used by Amazon either, and you don't need to buy a TLD for your internal network. You can call internal boxes whatever you want. So, they're probably just sitting on it like a-holes.
Publishers Weekly article from 2014 when they bought it: https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/bookselling/article/64762-amazon-book-and-the-new-top-level-domain-names.html
🧵 2/2
-
@fennix yes, but in their defense the idea that anyone would pay $10M to buy a tld and then do NOTHING with it is ludicrous.
In the case of .book i guess I can see the argument that if you can't have a .book domain you're maybe you're less likely to set up a site that might point to other resellers? Maybe?!?! Seems a stretch since everyone's going to sell on amazon anyway.
In the case of .author though? That's just mean. I guess the same argument applies though.
It's a stupid argument.
-
@fennix yes, but in their defense the idea that anyone would pay $10M to buy a tld and then do NOTHING with it is ludicrous.
In the case of .book i guess I can see the argument that if you can't have a .book domain you're maybe you're less likely to set up a site that might point to other resellers? Maybe?!?! Seems a stretch since everyone's going to sell on amazon anyway.
In the case of .author though? That's just mean. I guess the same argument applies though.
It's a stupid argument.
I mean, personally neither of those are compelling reasons for ICANN to have allowed Amazon ownership of those domains. ICANN should be serving the interests of the people on the planet, not auctioning off basic internet infrastructure to the highest bidders in private auctions.
Even if we wanted to say that was fine to do because of how domains are registered, fine, but it needs to have requirements set so that things like this can't be done explicitly. I'd bet they never set a rule like this because they're unimaginative and never considered ways it could be abused.
-
R AodeRelay shared this topic
