back to article Nominet mulls killing off the .co from

Nominet is seeking Brits' views on its proposals for slightly shorter .uk domain names with some layers of security thrown in. The non-profit company, which controls the .uk domain registry, hopes to introduce a new service for businesses called that could, by ditching the .co and the .org from and, …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. JimC


    But not, I suspect, no Salary. So if we can up the sales by flogging loads more entirely unnecessary domain names the money will just have to go, well, I'm sure you can imagine...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Non-Profit...

      I work for a Nominet tag holder and (amongst other duties) am in charge of domain registration. I have filed my objection to the plans.

    2. Mips

      Re: Non-Profit...

      And they want to auction names where there is competition!

  2. This post has been deleted by its author

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    My first reaction was "No! I *like* UK's third-level domain name set up as it's easier to distinguish betwen entities", but after thinking about it, I think it could actually be better, or at least a useful alternative? If there's one thing that winds me up it's companies not adhering to the proper designations and signing up for .net or addresses...

    1. RICHTO

      Re: Hmmm

      Bagsy,, and

  4. CaptainHook

    cash grab

    They are just hoping companies will now have to buy and .uk.

    1. M Gale

      Re: "They are just hoping companies will now have to buy and .uk."

      Or alternatively, just buy the and when someone tries to squat the .uk version, have it forcibly removed and get compensation into the bargain.

      This is the UK, after all, and there are precedents.

  5. frank ly

    Why ...

    ... did they decide on in the first place, instead of .uk?

    1. Christian Berger


      They wanted to get some structure into it.

      For example in Germany I think most universities used to have * with dp standing for "Deutsche Post", the German postal service also (back then) responsible for telephony and Internet.

      I remimber seeing state-based second level .us domains, too. It just was an interresting idea way back then. If you have a hirarchical system you might as well code some structure into it.

    2. batfastad

      Re: Why ...

      So they could flog all those first, holding back the top level, then release that for a higher price in 10-20 years' time once a high percentage of the decent .*.uk have gone.

    3. Kevin Johnston

      Re: Why ...

      My understanding was that this was to be the global standard with .co.countrycode so or or Unfortunately .com was also available and most large companies went for that as their primary as they were global so the thundering herd followed suit.

      1. Jonathan Richards 1

        Re: Why ... when it has unintended consequences

        As we have seen, registering and using a .com domain puts you within reach of the US Justice system with respect to materials you serve up with it. You may, or may not, like this 'feature'...

    4. Blane Bramble

      Re: Why ...

      DNS is supposed to be a hierarchy. The existing JANet name system was reversed (quite literally in this case) into DNS. Technically we should have a .gb name space, but .uk was preferred against the relevant standard. Nominet did the right thing and used the hierarchy to set up a sensible name space, and manage it in a way that is genuinely better than any other country registry that I am aware of. Now they seem to want to throw that all away.

  6. Bod

    Ditching of

    "But it's likely that down the line"

    I don't see anywhere this has been suggested, and quite the reverse they've said the more regulated short form will just sit beside to compliment it.

    So basically a company that wants to keep is free to do so and I dont see that changing. Those who want to pay more for the short version with the 'security' features of it can do if the really want. End user is probably not going to care either way as is as wired in everyone's minds as .com

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    1. philbo

      That was my first thought, too

      ..I wonder if this was lobbied for by French Connection just so they could get that domain name.

      1. Anonymous Coward 15

        Re: That was my first thought, too

        But what about all the Football Clubs?

        1. philbo

          Re: But what about all the Football Clubs?

          I'm sure they'll come up with a .fc TLD before too long.

  8. NinjasFTW
    Thumb Down

    bloody hell!

    My god,

    Can all of the registers please stop fucking around with the naming please.

    Every bloody week there is a new money making scheme and it is just going to end up confusing everyone and of course end up with every company having to maintain vast libraries of registrations (yes I know thats the point).

    is it time for the registers to be become non-profit companies? I think they've started to lose sight of their purpose!

  9. Purlieu

    I'd rather have

    .en please

    1. Wize

      Re: I'd rather have

      and a .sco and .crmu too?

      1. Neil Brown

        Re: I'd rather have

        Shotgun linux.sco for me.

      2. Purlieu

        Re: I'd rather have

        "nd a .sco and .crmu too?"

        that's rather up to them to ask, isn't it

        1. Gav

          Re: I'd rather have

          Who's "them"?

      3. ravenviz Silver badge

        Re: I'd rather have

        I think they should be .alb and .cym

    2. Andy Livingstone

      Re: I'd rather have

      Hardly necessary. There are no en who don't believe that they are uk anyway.

    3. captain veg Silver badge

      Re: I'd rather have

      Indeed. What will happen if/when Scotland votes for independence?


      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I'd rather have

        England becomes richer....

    4. mjwalshe

      Re: I'd rather have

      Should be .gb and not .en to be strictly ISO conformant

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I'd rather have

      .gb you mean

  10. Roger Stenning

    They decided on etc. because...

    The idea was that was to be commercial, was to be non-commercial (charities, non-profits, etc.), to be seats of learning (schools, highers, universities, etc), and so on, leaving,, etc, available to the government. The thinking was that by having a suffix, you'd know the site was here in Blighty. The problem is that it never really got that popular in the early days, and only when all the really good and fun .com and .org names were filched up, did folks begin thinking of the and domains. It's called "Snobbery", I think ;-)

    1. Peter Gathercole Silver badge

      Re: They decided on etc. because...

      Unfortunately, there was nobody policing the names, so anybody whether they were a company or not, was allowed to register a address. I had a long email exchange with Nominet about what I regarded as a cyber-squatter who had registered a name that matched a company I owned (beating me to it by a matter of hours which was suspicious as I had used a 'free' service to check it was available before I tried to registered it myself), and who didn't use it, or even have a real name-server serving it for several years.

      Even though mine was a limited company, which was set up specifically to be clever and have synergy with a domain name, and the person who had registered the name I wanted did *not* represent a company and was not using it, Nominet would not allow me to start an appeal.

      It is partly my fault for being slow in registering the name myself, but it was amazing that as soon as I made an attempt to check it was available (and it was), it suddenly became unavailable. Oh well. All ancient history now, as is my company (I got fed up with the bureaucracy of running a company in the UK).

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


  13. Tony Green
    Thumb Down

    Not very well thought-through.

    I'm sure there are more than a few situations where completely different people have to, and quite legitimately. So who gets the .uk and who gets booted?

    1. Ol'Peculier

      Re: Not very well thought-through.

      Me, for one.

      I share my with a (now unused) domain owned by Norwich Union.

      As it's a three letter one, don't see being able to grab it any time soon.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Not very well thought-through.

        As soon as the .uk addresses become available, if you want it, grab it. If NU don't use the one they have currently, they may not be monitoring the .uk release.

        1. Lusty

          Re: Not very well thought-through.

          "As soon as the .uk addresses become available"

          You mean, As soon as the .uk addresses become available AGAIN.

          if you care to visit you'll see this is nothing new, and Nominet have actually spent a good 10 years trying to stamp out the last of the .uk domains.

    2. Jerome 0

      Re: Not very well thought-through.

      Whoever pays up first.

    3. Richard Cranium

      Re: Not very well thought-through.

      Out of and gets it, .uk is intended to replace (supplement) org etc are unaffected.

      What seems wrong that someone with trademark xxx gets priority over

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    You actually raise an interesting question. Should we ever actually get rid of the spongers north of the border, what will become of, .uk? Will we get eng, .sco, .wal?

    Me I'd prefer to see .yorks and be done with the lot of them

    1. Daniel Bower

      Can we go one step further

      And have .syorks?

      1. ADG

        Re: Can we go one step further

        I certainly know people who would pay good money for .wyorks or similar.

        Sadly, it looks like there's not even a .ks TLD that we could piggy-back on. Best bet might be to register against Reunion's .re domain - e.g.

      2. DAN*tastik

        Re: Can we go one step further

        I wouldn't settle for anything less than somethingsomething.fullPostcode.floorNumber

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "Me I'd prefer to see .yorks and be done with the lot of them"

      As a proud Lancastrian I'd second that! :-D

    3. RICHTO

      The border in question being the Watford Gap?

  15. Christoph

    Bad idea

    Either a company with a has to buy the corresponding .uk, or someone else grabs it and you have and which are different companies. Tricky enough with the ones, but when both of the similar names are companies it will cause a *lot* of confusion.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bad idea

      "a company with a has to buy the corresponding .uk, or someone else grabs it and you have and which are different companies"

      Exactly, now cough up.

      1. Richard Cranium

        Re: Bad idea

        if I manage to get their lawyers are going to think it's christmas. if I get your small business name without the .co and start selling the same stuff as you, will you be able to afford the lawyers?

        Small business screwed again, just pay Nominet their protection money.

  16. Crisp

    It's difficult not to see this as a money making excersise.

    It seems like money for nothing. What is the actual tangable benefit here?

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Can't they just apply all these security features to the existing domains? I guess the won't get any extra money that way.

    1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      "Can't they just apply all these security features to the existing domains?"

      Indeed. The most disturbing aspect of this proposal is the implication that DNSSEC might be something you have to pay extra for in the UK. Do Nominet intend to drag their feet over signing the existing second level domains?

  18. Ottman001

    I feel conflicted about the idea of scanning for malware. I like the idea of dealing with vulnerabilities at source rather than hoping that granny will keep her browser patched and her antivirus software up to date. We know that approach doesn't work. Presumably, if found to be delivering malware, a site would be unreachable. Its traffic would probably be redirected to a page telling its users that the site admin is presently sitting on the naughty step.

    In a perfect world, this would be a great benefit to us all. But security software is never perfect. Anti-virus software packages have yo-yo-ed between good and bad over the years because the threats they are there to protect against are constantly evolving. When found to be bad, we have the option to switch to those found to be good. In this case, we don't.

    Would I want to trust my reputation to a piece of software over which I have no control? Especially if I were trading on it? What if after an update to detect a new exploit of a long standing vulnerability in IE, my site starts generating a false positive? I'd be chuffed if it worked 99.999% perfectly, but initally, I'd not host anything more than a forwarding page.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Part of the consultation asks what you think is an acceptable period from the owner being notified of malware being on their site to nominet making the site inaccessible. So it sounds like they're not just going to be shutting access to such sites down immediately, they'll be making the owner aware first and giving them a period of time (days/weeks) to fix it.

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

        "they'll be making the owner aware first and giving them a period of time (days/weeks) to fix it"

        But the scenario raised by the OP was "false positives". In this case, the software that needs to be fixed would be Nominet's scanner and consequently it wouldn't matter how long *you* were given to fix it.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    More secure websites? What about all those sites hosted abroad and the vulnerabilities this introduces in terms of who can access waht thanks to legislation that exists in those other states?

    Perhaps Nominet's time would be better spent trying to encourage the UK government to host UK government websites in - shock, horror - the UK?

  20. batfastad

    Nominet are b*ggers

    If this isn't about money and actually about simplifying customer choice, then they would give all current registrants first pick of having their name in the .uk top level.

    It would be easy to offer that priority through the Nominet online account system. But since this is about money, they probably won't do that. They can charge more for .uk as well, like many other ccTLD registries do.

    On a marginally-related rant, I hate not being able to manage my domain contact details with my registrar and having to do it directly with Nominet. So there.

    1. Gav

      Re: Nominet are b*ggers

      How do you give *both* and first pick on

      Can't be done, can it?

      1. batfastad

        Re: Nominet are b*ggers

        Whichever registrant registered theirs first. Though the creation date of domain names does tend to get munged when you transfer registrars. Maybe whoever linked their domain with Nominet's online system first.

        Or a closed auction between the two parties. Not ideal but better than an auction between 000s of parties. And better than just losing the domain to some other turd as at least you would have a say, even if you decide you can't afford it.

  21. PyLETS
    Thumb Down

    Cat's already out of the bag

    When you can have and and all registered by different entitites, many end users won't spot the difference and phishing gets rife. The more alternative ways there can be for expressing a name with something similar, the more end user brand confusion you are likely to get.

    1. Sandpit

      Re: Cat's already out of the bag

      There are already .uk addresses, you just can't get them any more eg.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Cat's already out of the bag

        From a well known online encyclopaedia: "Some domains delegated before the creation of Nominet UK remain. Examples include ... and (the British Library)."



      Re: Cat's already out of the bag

      It is not about brand confusion. It is about making a quick bob.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Good god!

    Errrrrrgh! Change!!!

  23. TMG


    Maybe they can change to our proper ISO domain name at the same time and give '.uk' back to Ukraine.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: .gb

      And Northern Ireland use what exactly?

      Considering it's The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

        Re: .gb

        "And Northern Ireland use what exactly?"

        I imagine half the population would be happy to use .gb and the other half are probably already registered under .ie so I really can't see this as a problem.

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. mjwalshe

          Re: .gb

          be carefull where you say that in parts of the Uk you woudl be lucky to get away without a kicking.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: .gb

      Because .uk looks cooler? .gb just doesn't work as well in text, and it's a bit weird to say it too. gee bee

  24. Derichleau
    Thumb Up

    How about restricting it to registered UK data controllers

    If they restricted the sale of .uk domains to registered UK data controllers only, then the user will be confident that the rights afforded them by the DPA98 will apply when doing business with a .uk website. For example, has a European data controller, not a UK one. As such, we as UK data subjects lose a lot of the rights granted to us by the DPA when registering with; including the right not to receive marketing. This is why Amazon's new Kindle Fire comes with advertising by default; because the data controller is based in Europe so we don't have the same rights. If had a UK data controller then you could easily opt out of all advertising from Amazon or take them to court if they refused.

  25. MJI Silver badge

    Not workable

    I have <aname>, someone else has <aname>, so who gets <aname>.uk?

    1. the-it-slayer
      Paris Hilton

      Re: Not workable

      Highest bidder? Or actually get Paris to decide? Both are the same and extremely painful.

  26. Andus McCoatover

    Solution to a problem that doesn't exist???

    nuff said

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    And why would you like that?

    Because the mess (and killing) ICANN (and their chosen cronies) are making?

    Every time I see something like this, I wonder. What, exactly, is stopping us from going totally flatspace? This hierarchical set-up is clearly Math Hard[tm] for all the internet Barbies[tm] out there. Just shell out a few quid for another TLD, and be done with it. N'mind that all the good ones will be gone by the time you get around to registering something, I'm sure some squatter will be delighted to sell you something for much more than you'd anticipated. Free market, see? What's with the subdomains and the artificial monopolies, the silly rules and the awkward procedures, anyway?

    What's the point of rules if you can't come up with a good and proper plan, anyway?

    1. mjwalshe

      Re: And why would you like that?

      new tld cost around $500,000 a large chunk of which is a non returnable deposit

    2. Andus McCoatover

      Re: And why would you like that?

      Dunno. Maybe it's the reason that "" (one of my domains*) hasn't had any offers yet. Good name for a fish-and-chip shop, run by a bloke called "Andy", methought.....But no.

      Subdomains? is taken, but isn't.

      Neither is (There IS a God....)

      *domain? Sounds a bit pretentious. "Pretentious, Moi??"

  28. PassiveSmoking

    I wonder how many people are queueing up to register "s", "f" or "y" second level domains?

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Nominet already support DNSSEC: and scan for phishing sites: notification so not a huge improvement. As I work with their systems then .uk would be beneficial to the company I work for (more sales) but I'm not convinced about a wider need.

  30. Gordon Pryra

    Why complain?

    The whole system has been laughable since '85 with the USA even claiming legal authority over all .COM addresses instead of the .US TLD.

    Without an actual REAL standard thats applicable acrosss the board and with the debarcle being allowed by Internic we are left with anything to do with TLD's just being a money grab.

    That they describe themselves as a not for profit is also laughable, as someone above says, you can bet that does not mean not for Salary

  31. AndrueC Silver badge

    Meanwhile presumably they'll leave '' alone?

  32. Simple Simon

    Who Cares...

    about domain names?

    Don't most people just use a search engine anyway? Even more so now that browsers seem to have done away with the separate field for search.

    The point being, that you just type what you want in the URL field, and and your search-engine-of-choice takes you there with just one further click.

    And, when was the last time you saw a domain name on a print or TV advert?

    1. fridaynightsmoke

      Re: Who Cares...

      "And, when was the last time you saw a domain name on a print or TV advert?", and all were advertised on the radio this morning when I was driving to work.

      Almost every print advert I saw in The Times today had a domain name shown.

      1. M Gale

        Re: Who Cares...

        Don't forget to compare the meerkat (dot com). It's not about car insurance you know!

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Money for old rope

    Especially as they can charge more for a 2nd level domain than a 3rd level one.

    can we .fu to Nominet please

  34. Mike Henderson

    The .NZ registry has just been consulting on this idea

    For an unmoderated use of .nz at the second level, of course, not for .uk

    You can see the consultation paper and submissions on the subject here

  35. Will Godfrey Silver badge

    Dunno why nobody promotes the existing - supposedly only available to limited companies (which should be a good chunk of them).

    1. Richard Cranium

      Because that SLD is (was) strictly policed so you HAD to be a ltd co to use (btw Google delivers 780,000 results, that's not 780K domains as there will be multipl epages in the results).

      One problem was if the status of the company changed they had to drop the SLD losing screwing up their web traffic and email addresses. I heard of one that grew into a PLC got the corresponding domain (86,000 on google) then split into two LTDs one recovering the name once more losing the web and email addresses associated with the PLC.

      Another problem is that nobody expects to see, don't know what it implies, zero recognition factor.

  36. John H Woods Silver badge

    I can't resist pointing out ...

    ... what happens when there are too many different domains and subdomains. A particularly egregious case is that some noob registered National Schools Film Week at whereas is a well known porn site.

    You can argue (and I would) that the person responsible for this error should be given a stiff talking to. But the more different options there are, the worse the situation becomes. The problem is, we need Nominet and their ilk to be motivated to rationalise and improve for the sake of the internet users, but they seem to have all become vehicles for enriching their staff.

  37. s. pam Silver badge

    SCAM, RIpoff, Useless idea, Twits!

    As a member of the wider community commenting on this FARCE of abject stupidity in the Nominet game, this is a SCAM, will NOT secure anything, but will RAISE money for the registrar.

    Country codes, E.G. .co. .fr .ie are the area international standards bodies. Internet naming is built from direction of ICANN and why the heck Nominet has come up with this idiotic idea we do not know.

    We DO know you should comment against it, or chaos will ensue.

  38. WaveSynthBeep

    Misfeature interaction

    I've thought of at least one way this is a piece of fail.

    So, the virus scanner spots that my site is full of malware (according to itself). They de-activate the domain. So what happens to all the emails flying around my company, or between me and Nominet, which are addresses Nominet don't run my DNS, so they can't turn off A but keep MX They can spoof my domain, but then DNSSEC will trip them up. They can do the DNS on their own authority, but it will trip up anything that expects my DNS to be signed by me. And even if they proxy DNS to my servers so that MX still works, what if everyone in the company uses for mail instead?

    So such a domain cannot be a primary domain for a company, because the chance of having your email go down is just too big a risk. Which means it will only be a vanity thing - ie just another tax the marketing department has to pay.

  39. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Protection racket to enrich registrars at the cost of small business

    This will be a bonanza for the "legitimate" domain name providers, for the dubious domain name traders and the legal profession.

    The reason we could have,, was to separate non-profit organisations from internet service providers and businesses. and could happily co-exist.

    The proposed .uk is intended for business use and so effectively replaces, names under etc should be unaffected.

    Reading the bumph the current owner of is up the proverbial creek. A legitimate trade mark holder could lay claim to and a "dispute resolution process" would decide (£££).

    I've got a premium domain name bought the first day of the switch from the old naming committee to Nominet. There are people who use the same word as a trade mark (bear in mind that under trade mark legislation it is OK two companies to use the same name as a trademark as long as they are using it for different categories of product so both might have a "legitimate" claim to the name). Last weeks valuation of my name around £50,000, today? anyone's guess but certainly less. Reading the FAQ it seems that trade mark holders are to be given priority over "those with unregistered rights" - who are those? "Existing registrants may have an unregistered right".

    I see they are making mention of "sunrise periods" - been screwed on that one before with .eu (paid a premium to sunrise my ltd company name as a .eu, at the end of sunrise they sent an email to say rejected, no reason given, no opportunity to fix. Immediately attempted to buy post-sunrise but a speculator had got in first. As it was not a common name, nobody else in Europe was trading under that name, the only conclusion was that the people handling sunrise applications had a nice little earner running.)

    Aside from that, sunrise = £££ so I and anyone else who'd like the name, legitimate or not, splash a few hundred to be entered into the lottery...?

    If Nominet would like to break with their history (no room for those stories now) and act with integrity (Nominet if you're reading this the word may be unfamiliar. Google for [define:integrity]) they would disallow purchase of to anyone other than, if don't want to pay then should be frozen.

    The existing owners may be quite happy with If they switch, people will be able to save 3 keystrokes - at the expense of adding confusion just as the second level domain does. It sounds like they will be forced to try to buy it for no other reason than to protect themselves. Or to put it another way, it's a protection racket. It's just like those phone calls and junk mail all domain owners get trying to sell you the equivalent of in some other TLD.

    Registrants are not important, to Nominet, this is about making money for Nominet Members (registrars) by screwing more out of registrants.

    Nominet argue that they will now check a registrant has a UK address so the quality of registrations will improve. Or to put it another way, current registrants will be able to pay extra so Nominet can make up for their past failure to do anything more that trouser the fees.

    Clued up registrants MAY be OK, what about those who don't get the message in time or don't understand the implications (probably small businesses). If for one reason or another, fails to secure and Nominet now allow his competitor to register there's clear case of passing off - call the lawyers, find £50,000 to start a civil action...

    I expect Nominet will say "we will contact all registrants". No they won't, the quality of their existing database is not good enough, how many small-biz that registered 10 years ago have carefully updated their contact info? I've got a real life example. A friend called for advice. They had a secondary domain name pointing at their primary web-site, it had stopped working. My first response was "have you paid the domain name renewal fee?" - Yes nearly a year till expiry. So I investigated. Nominet had found a minor irregularity with registration details (all the data was correct just one bit was in the wrong field) so they cancelled the name at 14 days notice. The problem was the "notice" was to an expired email address. Hadn't tried using post or phone or checking on the web site. OK, the expired email address should have been updated but email isn't the most reliable system, all kinds of over aggressive spam filters out there. And compare 14 days notice with the notice given if renewal not paid on time, several months. The name was back on the open market, friend immediately re-purchased what should have been their own rather than waste time and effort battling bureaucrats.

    Sure the current Nominet situation is poor, but this proposal isn't a solution, it benefits nobody but registrars and creates more problems than it solves. It opens up more names for cybersquatting, though the owners will have to pay more and do more.

    If I want the other "benefits", daily malware scan and digital signature, I can buy those services now for any domain why must I be forced to? I can stick a "quality

    While this may be presented as a way of making more names available it does nothing of the sort. If I managed to get before someone else (!) I'd not have long to wait before their lawyers were in touch. If I was and a speculator got it would be a matter of paying his ransom fee. If it was a competitor rather than a speculator then what?

    Nominet Membership is made up of domain name registrars and although Nominet is a not for profit organisation those registrar businesses are commercial and an 8 fold increase in turnover probably sounds like "a good thing" - for them at any rate.

    I notice that one uk registrar, 123reg, has recently started offering "Site Scanner", 5 pages for £3.50 a month. I wonder if this is in anticipation of the change, the Malware Scanner Nominte speaks of - and I wonder if it's telling us that Nominet's proposed "£20 a month plus registrar markup" might imply that the registrars will then point out that the included scanner only covers 5 pages so you'll need the upgrade...£££

    ACTION: how would this kind of input be regarded if submitted as a response to the consultation? Will Turkeys be voting for Christmas? Best lobbying MP, Vince Cable, FSB, e-Petition?

  40. LazyBoy

    There are 125 Nominet members calling for an EGM over this according to They have set up the site as an action page to campaign to non domainers to try and stop this madness

    Nomient looks to have woken members up with this, something nobody has been able to do for many years. It could be too late for them to row back now even if they drop it

    This may see the end of Nominet's clan rather than the

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like