New .uk TLD utterly pointless?

[Aod]

So last night I'm considering starting a little business doing a little bit of work on the side as an extension of my hobby, in which I'm fairly well known by a nickname.

Looking on Tsohost, my preferred hosting provider and registrar, I see that nickname.co.uk is taken, but the new nickname.uk is free, Woohoo I think, and click "buy" on nickname.uk, and I'm greeted with a sizeable warning, essentially alerting me that the owner of nickname.co.uk had the "Right of registration" on the .uk domain, a right that is free and uninterrupted until 2019 as long as the .co.uk domain remains registered!

Now, I don't know about you, but does this not seem pointless? Why bother having the .uk domain separately registered from the .co.uk, .org.uk and other domains at all, if owning one grants automatic rights to the .uk domain for the next five years? Surely the point of issuing more tlds is that people who want a domain name that is already registered have the opportunity to register with one of the new TLDs?

 

[Clav]

Basically it's to protect the first registrant of nickname.co.uk in case you decide to use their name in an unsavoury manner. Such as set up a competing business or distribute malware etc.

 

[BattFink]

It's quite frustrating for me as well, I've got a domain registered (my surname) as a .org.uk & a uk.net. However there's a cybersquatter holding .com & co.uk

I'd prefer to drop the .org.uk & .uk.net domains and just have a .uk address, but can't register it as it's reserved for the co.uk domain holder

 

[Aod]

Basically it's to protect the first registrant of nickname.co.uk in case you decide to use their name in an unsavoury manner. Such as set up a competing business or distribute malware etc.

Yep, I understand that. In this instance nickname.co.uk is a blog that hasn't been updated since Dec. 2010 and the business I want to start is completely unrelated.

I definitely understand the point of protecting .co.uk owners from people phishing with .uk domains, but I think 5 years of "free protection" is a little ridiculous.

It's quite frustrating for me as well, I've got a domain registered (my surname) as a .org.uk & a uk.net. However there's a cybersquatter holding .com & co.uk

I'd prefer to drop the .org.uk & .uk.net domains and just have a .uk address, but can't register it as it's reserved for the co.uk domain holder

I can't stand cybersquatters, absolutely infuriating

 

[andshrew]

Yep, I understand that. In this instance nickname.co.uk is a blog that hasn't been updated since Dec. 2010 and the business I want to start is completely unrelated.

I definitely understand the point of protecting .co.uk owners from people phishing with .uk domains, but I think 5 years of "free protection" is a little ridiculous.

How recently the blog has been updated is really irrelevant if you're trying to determine whether the domain is being used. For example I have no www presence on my own domains, it doesn't mean they aren't being used.

I don't think there is really much you can do other than try and contact the owner of the .co.uk, or come up with another name.

 

[Caged]

Email the owner of the .co.uk, explain the situation, offer money for the .uk (assuming you can transfer them).

If you want a decent domain you need to be prepared to make unsolicited offers to buy them - a company I used to work with last year bagged a three letter .co.uk and it took a lot of convincing from me that a £2000 offer was a bargain.

 

[stoofa]

Do wish people would stop using the word "cyber-squatters". You really don't know what people do with domains. Hold them for future projects, use them purely for email, purely for FTP, purely for DNS - I hold many domains which have no website associated with them and look like they are just "being held" but they are in use.
There is also a massive difference between "cyber-squatters" and "savvy business people". Basically there is no such thing as a cyber-squatter these days. They would register a domain with the strict intention of getting money out of somebody - 21stcenturyfox for example, all those people who decided to buy microsoft.something when a new TLD appeared.
As nearly every case of this sees the copyright holder get the domain, there is no point doing this. However a savvy person will see the potential in an unregistered domain. Sorry if this means you cannot get the domain you want - it is however first come, first served.

The .uk situation is annoying as when it was first announced we were told than me.uk and org.uk holders would also get the chance to go for the .uk version. That would be sold on a first-come-fisr-served basis. So in theory three people maxiumum would all be going for the .uk.
Unfortunately they changed this late on, so now co.uk holders effectively have the .uk reserved for them for 5 years.

My only annoynance through all of this is that a few years back I sold a 2-character co.uk domain for £10k. I held out for this amount after much lower bids started trickling through. At the time I felt it was a good price etc. Of course if I still held that now I would now own a 2-char .uk domain which I feel would be worth an awful lot more.
Oh well - no point worrying about the past.

 

[Aod]

Do wish people would stop using the word "cyber-squatters". You really don't know what people do with domains. Hold them for future projects, use them purely for email, purely for FTP, purely for DNS - I hold many domains which have no website associated with them and look like they are just "being held" but they are in use.
There is also a massive difference between "cyber-squatters" and "savvy business people". Basically there is no such thing as a cyber-squatter these days. They would register a domain with the strict intention of getting money out of somebody - 21stcenturyfox for example, all those people who decided to buy microsoft.something when a new TLD appeared.
As nearly every case of this sees the copyright holder get the domain, there is no point doing this. However a savvy person will see the potential in an unregistered domain. Sorry if this means you cannot get the domain you want - it is however first come, first served.

The .uk situation is annoying as when it was first announced we were told than me.uk and org.uk holders would also get the chance to go for the .uk version. That would be sold on a first-come-fisr-served basis. So in theory three people maxiumum would all be going for the .uk.
Unfortunately they changed this late on, so now co.uk holders effectively have the .uk reserved for them for 5 years.

My only annoynance through all of this is that a few years back I sold a 2-character co.uk domain for £10k. I held out for this amount after much lower bids started trickling through. At the time I felt it was a good price etc. Of course if I still held that now I would now own a 2-char .uk domain which I feel would be worth an awful lot more.
Oh well - no point worrying about the past.

When I say or think of cyber-squatters, I don't mean a domain that doesn't have an active site attached to it, I mean all those domains that have "Trendy web search virus-finder 2000! Email webmaster if you want to buy this domain now now now!" which are all over the place.

I'm not suggesting that the owner of the .co.uk domain is cyber-squatting simply because the site attached to the domain isn't in active use. I own a domain with no site attached to it whatsoever but I use it for email.

Effectively though, anyone who owns a .co.uk or .org.uk domain but has no interest in the .uk domain is "squatting" in the .uk domain involuntarily for five years.

 

[Trifid]

Really they are forcing the hand of the .co.uk owners to spend more money on the .uk one. Several years down the line people are going to get used to not typing in .co and will be going to the wrong site/wrong email address.

I really dislike the whole flood of domains that is happening at the moment that cheapen the web.