Home ›
About Us ›
Consultations ›
Reserved short domains consultation ›
Responses
The responses to the consultation are published below. Individual responses are also available to view as pdfs.
1. Do you agree that two letter domain names should be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
2. Do you agree that one character domain names should be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
3. Do you agree that existing country codes under ISO 3166-1 such as fr, de, es, us etc be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
4. We outlined the technical reasons why com.co.uk, org.co.uk and net.co.uk should not be released. Do you agree with these exceptions?
5. Do you agree that existing generic top level domains (e.g. biz, info) should be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
6. Do you agree that existing .uk second level domains (e.g. co, org, ac, me, ltd) should also be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk?
7. Do you agree that "uk" should continue to be reserved from registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
8. We propose to take the same approach for two letter, one character and the other previously unreleased domains (e.g. pro.co.uk). Do you agree with this proposal?
9. The PAB recommended a two stage release process: a first round for holders of registered trademarks, and a second round for names not taken by rights holders, open to holders of unregistered rights. Do you agree with this recommendation?
10. The PAB recommended a cut off date for qualifying rights for IP rights holders. They suggested 1996 and 2002 as possible dates. What do you think would be a suitable cut off date?
11. We propose that initially commercial organisations should have priority in.co.uk and charities and not for profit organisations should have priority in org.uk. Do you agree with this approach?
12. We propose to hold a sealed bid auction for domain names where rights holders are competing, and for domain names not taken up by rights holders. Do you think there is a fairer way to allocate the first registration of these domain names?
13.We propose to hold a Dutch auction for the general release ("landrush") of domains not taken up by rights holders. Do you think there is a fairer way to allocate the first registration of these domain names?
14. We plan to run this whole exercise on a cost recovery basis, and any surplus funds generated from auctions would be donated to Nominet Trust, a charitable organisation established by Nominet with the objects including the education, relief of financial hardship and protection of children in the area of the Internet and information technology. Do you agree with this approach?
1. Do you agree that two letter domain names should be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
2. Do you agree that one character domain names should be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
3. Do you agree that existing country codes under ISO 3166-1 such as fr, de, es, us etc be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
4. We outlined the technical reasons why com.co.uk, org.co.uk and net.co.uk should not be released. Do you agree with these exceptions?
5. Do you agree that existing generic top level domains (e.g. biz, info) should be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
6. Do you agree that existing .uk second level domains (e.g. co, org, ac, me, ltd) should also be released for registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk?
7. Do you agree that "uk" should continue to be reserved from registration in co.uk, org.uk, net.uk and me.uk as recommended by the PAB?
8. We propose to take the same approach for two letter, one character and the other previously unreleased domains (e.g. pro.co.uk). Do you agree with this proposal?
9. The PAB recommended a two stage release process: a first round for holders of registered trademarks, and a second round for names not taken by rights holders, open to holders of unregistered rights. Do you agree with this recommendation?
10. The PAB recommended a cut off date for qualifying rights for IP rights holders. They suggested 1996 and 2002 as possible dates. What do you think would be a suitable cut off date?
11. We propose that initially commercial organisations should have priority in.co.uk and charities and not for profit organisations should have priority in org.uk. Do you agree with this approach?
12. We propose to hold a sealed bid auction for domain names where rights holders are competing, and for domain names not taken up by rights holders. Do you think there is a fairer way to allocate the first registration of these domain names?
13.We propose to hold a Dutch auction for the general release ("landrush") of domains not taken up by rights holders. Do you think there is a fairer way to allocate the first registration of these domain names?
14. We plan to run this whole exercise on a cost recovery basis, and any surplus funds generated from auctions would be donated to Nominet Trust, a charitable organisation established by Nominet with the objects including the education, relief of financial hardship and protection of children in the area of the Internet and information technology. Do you agree with this approach?
Responses by month as pdf:
Individual responses are available to view as pdfs:
Related contacts
For questions regarding your .uk domain name Telephone: 01865 332244 Email: nominet@nominet.org.uk For questions from our members and registrars Telephone: 01865 332233 Email: support@nominet.org.uk To make a payment Telephone: 01865 332348 Email: payments@nominet.org.uk Reception/Switchboard Telephone: 01865 332211
