Latest news of the domain name industry

Recent Posts

Another failing gTLD not paying its “onerous” dues

Kevin Murphy, January 15, 2019, 15:12:46 (UTC), Domain Registries

ICANN has sent out its first public contract breach notice of the year, and it’s going to another new gTLD registry that’s allegedly not paying its fees.
The dishonor goes to Who’s Who Registry, manager of the spectacularly failing gTLD .whoswho.
According to ICANN, the registry hasn’t paid its registry fees for several months and hasn’t been responding to private compliance outreach.
The company has a month to pay up or risk suspension or termination.
CEO John McCabe actually wrote to ICANN (pdf) the day after one of its requests for payment in November, complaining that its fees were too “onerous” and should be reduced for registries that are “good actors” with no abuse.
ICANN’s annual $25,000 fee is “the single largest item in .whoswho’s budget”, McCabe wrote, “the weight of which suppresses development of the gTLD”.
Whether ICANN fees are to blame is debatable, but all the data shows that .whoswho, which has been in general availability for almost four years, has failed hard.
It had 100 domains under management at the last count, once you ignore all the domains owned by the registry itself. This probably explains the lack of abuse.
Well over half of these names were registered through brand-protection registrars. ICANN statistics show 44 names were registered during its sunrise period.
A Google search suggests that only four people are currently using .whoswho for its intended purpose and one of those is McCabe himself.
The original intent of .whoswho was to mimic the once-popular Who’s Who? books, which contain brief biographies of notable public figures.
The gTLD was originally restricted to registrants who had actually appeared in one of these books, but the registry scrapped that rule and slashed prices from $70 to $20 a year in 2016 after poor uptake.
I’d venture the opinion that, in a world of LinkedIn and Wikipedia, Who’s Who? is an idea that might have had its day.

Tagged: , , , , ,

Comments (5)

  1. Brad Mugford says:

    They knew the rules when they applied.
    Bad extension. Bad business model.
    It deserves to fail.
    Brad

  2. graham haynes says:

    Second that Brad

  3. Snoopy says:

    The extension is junk, the registry should stop blaming everyone else and let this bad idea die. Icann isn’t a charity.

  4. Dizzy says:

    They increased the wholesale price back to $75 in Oct 2018 with very little notice to registrars.

Add Your Comment