Our new platform is already available at www.gandi.net

Go to the new Gandi

What's the difference between a cam and a camera anyway? They both take photos and videos, but a cam is enhanced by the internet.

Sure, on the one hand, that means selfies and doggy daycare cams. And who doesn't love selfies and doggy cams?

But also with a webcam, families separated by continents and oceans can talk face-to-face, news can be streamed live online as it happens, someone unable to speak can relay a message to someone else unable to see or read signs. Or a window can be opened from your desktop to another place.

There's nothing wrong with photos, but with the power of the web, a camera becomes so much more powerful (just remember to cover yours up when you're not using it).

That power is also behind the new TLD .cam.

On Wednesday, December 14, .cam will be entering the GoLive phase. That means .cam domains will be open to everyone, first come, first served, for $40.25 per year at A rates*.

If you've got a vision to share, get your .cam now.

Get a .cam?



*Prices in USD. See .cam page for local pricing.

What makes a work of art? A century ago, experts might have measured art by its technical skill, a mastery of composition and form, or the even the inspiration of some kind of pathos on the part of the observer. But then artists and their appreciators spent decades jackhammering these sacred cows of artistic value, constantly re-sculpting and remolding the definition of art itself.

But we're not here to solve the unresolved tensions of art theory. Suffice it to say that art has value. At least to some. When some new expression of the artistic zeitgeist comes along, if you're the type of person or organization that can't miss out, then we have some important news for you.

On December 7, 2016 .art, the only TLD oriented specifically to the art world, is entering the Sunrise phase. That means if you're in that world and you have a trademark registered with Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH), you can register your .art domain for $300.62 for first year registration*, ahead of anyone else, until February 7, 2017.

Art-related non-profits, museums, institutions, galleries, and artists without a TMCH-registered trademark won't miss out entirely, though.

From February 8, 2017, until May 9, 2017, such established members of the art world can register their .art domains at Landrush pricing  per year**.

Finally, .art domains can also now be purchased in the GoLive phase, which begins May 10, 2017. Domains purchased in this phase are available for $17.44 per year at A rates* and are open to anyone with a creative spirit and an interest in art. However you want to define it.

Register your .art?


*Prices in USD. For local pricing, see .art page.

**Landrush pricing for .art has yet to be finalized. We will let you know what those prices are when they become available.

Blogs are so ubiquitous these days, we've started to take them for granted. But when blogs first came out they were a big deal. Blogs made it possible to publish things online without having to write out the HTML (or other code) and upload directly to a server using FTP.

With a blog you can sign in, type right into your web browser, and publish with a single click. It didn't just make the web easier, it opened up a whole world to the technically inexperienced masses.

And that's why it's a big deal that as for today, .blog, the blog-oriented new TLD, is open to the masses too: it has now entered the GoLive phase. You can now get your .blog for just $38.35 per year at A rates*.

Because the blogs make the internet easy, we're making blogging easy with one-click Wordpress installation on our Simple Hosting instances.

You're already entitled to a ten-day free trial on Simple Hosting, and when you register your .blog domain at Gandi, we'll give you a promo code for 50% off a one-year subscription.

Start a .blog?



*Prices in USD. See .blog for local pricing details.

Want this look?

First, start off with the brows. We're using a repeating black and gray textured image.

Next, for our foundation we're using a grey with just a slight hint of yellow in it, with some bright white concealer. No blending.

And then, of course, we do some contouring with a big bright GoLive phase. And now, as of November 8, 2016, top off this look or any other with a .makeup domain. L'Oréal's .makeup TLD is now in the GoLive phase and as such is open to all and available for $250.61 per year at A rates*.

Get this look? Register your .makeup:


*Prices in USD. See .makeup pricing page for local prices.

When we checked in on the new gTLD program in June, we mentioned very briefly a "control mechanism" called DPML which has been, for some time now, implemented by Donuts. In particular, we noted how successful this program has been and speculated that we may see such mechanisms applied across-the-board by ICANN, especially when the next round of new gTLD applications opens.

But for now, Donuts is still fine-tuning this feature and making adjustments and changes as it goes along. That's especially the case when it comes to pricing.

As of January 1, 2017, prices for their DPML service, which Donuts is now calling "Legacy DPML" are doubling. At the same time, for a limited time, they are now offering an enhanced, "upgrade" under the name DPML Plus.

About DPML

We need to back up a little bit, though, to talk about what exactly this feature is. DPML stands for Domains Protected Marks List. Donuts, the registry with the largest new gTLD portfolio out there, since the beginning of 2014 has been letting trademark owners leverage their large portfolio to protect their brand names against cybersquatters on all TLDs for which they are responsible. Donuts TLD portfolio is now at almost 200 TLDs. Instead of having to defensively register terms, which can entail rapidly ballooning costs (there are now over a thousand active new gTLDs), DPML customers pay less and get protection across Donuts's entire portfolio.

To purchase the service, trademark owners first submit a request to Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH). Then, using the SMD file received from TMCH, they can request a "block" on a protected term. A blocked domain, then, simply cannot be registered and will not have DNS resolution. In effect, it's the same outcome that most people want with a defensive registration, but with no actual domain name registration involved and hence a lower cost associated.

If you purchase a DPML block, you can protect your trademark or related terms for a period of five to ten years with the option to renew annually after that.

If a trademark holder attempts to register a domain only to find it blocked, if they have the SMD file for an applicable TMCH claim, they can then request a DPML Override.

If you would like to know all the details, Donuts has a complete overview of the service available on their site.


In addition to raising the price on this "legacy" service, from October 1 through December 31, Donuts is offering a special promotion on DPML Plus, the new, enhanced versione. DPML Plus will only be available during the three-month promotion period. In the meantime, they have ceased invoicing override fees.

DPML Plus will include a few tempting new enhancements that are not part of the "legacy" service and will not be available for blocks purchased after the new year. These enhancements include:

  • Domain blocks will start at an initial 10 years
  • Block not only the TMCH-registered term but also three additional terms (such as spelling variations or related terms) across all TLDs managed by Donuts
  • Extended protection over all new gTLDs managed by Donuts whether "classic" or "premium" (the "legacy" service does not include premiums)
  • Unlimited overrides without additional fees
  • Block an override requested by another TMCH holder of an identical term
  • Optional add-on to block three more terms for an added fee

Any current DPML registration is eligible for a discounted upgrade to DPML Plus. Otherwise anyone wishing to renew the "legacy" service before the price increase on January 1st can do so before December 31.

As always, feel free to contact us if you have any questions about this and especially if you'd like to sign up for the DPML Plus service. We also recommend taking a look at the information published by Donuts on their site.

One common concern about the new gTLD program is the difficulty and expense of protecting intellectual property from domain squatters. With DPML and the new DPML Plus products, Donuts offers one more cost-conscious solution. We'll be interested to watch this service and how ICANN may incorporate some of its features into the new gTLD program as a whole in the coming months and years.

As of November 2 at 8:00 AM PDT, the .doctor is in. And you can schedule your appointment (i.e. your domain name) right away.

Now that .doctor is in the GoLive phase, .doctor domains are available for $116.59 per year* at A rates. That means .doctor is open to all kinds of doctors: medical doctors, doctors of philosophy, love doctors, you name it.

So get your .doctor today. No insurance required.

Register a .doctor?



*Prices in USD. See the .doctor pricing page for local prices.

While both .rest (for restaurants) and .bar (for, well, bars) have been open for business since 2014, today, October 19 the special, exclusive .bar and .rest are opening up too.

We're talking of course about premium domains.

These are the exclusive .rest and .bar's that are in high-demand, with a steeper price of admission to go with it. Here's just a sample menu of available options:

airport.bar (for that pre-flight grog)
exotic.bar (for all the rum drinks you can stomach)
fight.bar (first rule is: don't talk about fight.bar)
american.bar (play this one again, Sam)
cajun.rest (jumbalaya and crawfish pies)
buenosaires.rest (probably a steak house with a good house Malbec. Tuesdays are Tango night)
detroit.rest (for good food and good music, we assume)

As you can see, it's mostly a mix between some nice generic names and more geographic names.

Open that .bar or .rest you always wanted?:


At midnight on October 1 after the expiration of the US Department of Commerce's contract, IANA authority reverted directly back to ICANN, for the first time removing  nominal US government control over name and number delegation on the internet.

Back in March, we discussed the creation and development of the IANA function by Jon Postel and the mini-coup he effected in 1998 when he unilaterally instructed regional root nameserver operators to switch from Network Solutions's root server to IANA's root nameserver.

We noted that this action led directly to the creation of ICANN by the Clinton administration to take over the IANA function. What we didn't mention at that time, though, was the unique model that ICANN represented as an organization responsible, essentially, for internet governance. Nor did we directly bring up the impending deadline which happened at the end of last month: the expiration of the US Department of Commerce's contract for IANA functions.

The plan, ever since Jon Postel provoked the Clinton administration into creating ICANN, has been to devolve responsibility of IANA functions away from the US Department of Commerce's contract and transition to a "multi-stakeholder model," namely, the one created by ICANN.

Now, with the expiration of the Department of Commerce's contract on September 30, the transition away from any direct governmental control over IANA functions, even the nominal control by the Department of Commerce, is set to take place.

But not without some challenges. ICANN opponents sought to undermine the transition and wanted to renew the Department of Commerce contract.

We're going to get a little topical here. Not because we're trying to make a political statement but because delegating new domains is kind of our home turf, so we happen to know a little bit about this.

What are IANA functions?

If you want the history, see our Tech Fundamentals post on it, but real briefly, IANA is responsible for what are mundane but essential functions required for the internet, such as:

  •     delegating IP address blocks to regional Internet registries, which in turn delegate them, for example, to ISPs, who then delegate them to their customers
  •     administer the root nameservers, which return lists of authoritative name servers for TLDs
  •     administer protocol parameters like URI and character-encoding sets
  •     run the timezone database that is mirrored by computers and other devices on the internet

Or, to put it succinctly: the IANA functions aren't the "phonebook" as they have often been compared to in recent media, they tell you where to find the phonebook. They're at the top of the hierarchy for anytime you (or your computer) need to know how and where to find another device on the internet.

What's at stake?

The question posed by the IANA transition is the question of who gets to govern the internet. There are certain people who claimed that the Department of Commerce contract should have been renewed rather than have the IANA functions devolve directly to ICANN essentially because the US government should continue to govern the internet.

The reason Jon Postel's 1998 redelegation is significant is precisely because it demonstrated that US government control over IANA was symbolic at best. Postel's authority effectively superceded the Department of Commerce and it was the informal consensus among root nameserver operators to comply with Postel's authority that won the day.

There is the argument out there, though, that world governments should have equal authority to regulate IANA functions. Various international efforts have been made to move the IANA functions under the purview of some international body, usually part of the United Nations. Many of these proposals are colored with language referring to concepts like "cyber-sovereignty."

Cyber-sovereignty movements seek to formalize a regional control model subservient to local governments, specifically for those critical root nameserver and IP delegation functions. In a sense, to Balkanize the internet.

The best possible outcome would mean nothing other than the status quo in many places, but it's worth noting the US government has historically exerted little control, compared to what it could have, over IANA functions (more on that below).

The choice, then, was essentially between two options:

  1. Allow ICANN to formally take over and end the Department of Commerce contract
  2. Renew the contract and thereby open a new round of discussions internationally about how IANA functions should be governed

To be clear: (most) everyone agrees that what isn't broke shouldn't be fixed, that ICANN should be left intact and should continue as it has. The main question was whether the nominal regulatory authority of the US government should be removed entirely or if it should be replaced by regional or intergovernmental authorities (which may choose to exert more influence than the US government historically has).

What's so great about ICANN

It's not so hard to find fault with ICANN and its apparent inefficacy in the face of your pet problem like its poor record on privacy issues. Or to characterize its meetings as dry and tedious, but, really, ICANN is a unique proposition.

We haven't extensively covered ICANN's structure, nor will we here (maybe later).

They call it a "multi-stakeholder model." Often, this is construed as being controlled by businesses and other private interests, but the reality is that ICANN is a step closer to an open and "democratic" model than what this characterization suggests.

ICANN at least aims for a few core values, and chief among them are openness and inclusiveness. For example, despite being headquartered in Los Angeles, ICANN meetings are held at sites around the world, rotating between continents. In June 2015, ICANN 53 was held in Buenos Aires. ICANN 54 last October was held in Dublin. Then, ICANN 55 took place in Marrakech in March. ICANN 56 was this past June in Helsinki and ICANN 57 is coming in November to Hyderabad.

Another way that ICANN fulfills its commitment to openness and inclusivenesss is that ICANN meetings are free and open to all, with public forum sessions and live streaming for remote audiences who can even chime in through a chat. And they also takes public comments on their website and blog commenting.

ICANN's decision-making process also relies heavily on building consensus and aims for a "bottom up" agenda.

These "democratic" elements are all baked into ICANN's bylaws and they'd need consensus to be changed.

And significant to this most recent debate is the role governments play in this process. They obviously do have a seat at the table since world governments are no doubt stakeholders in internet governance. ICANN's structure includes governments' direct input in their decision-making through the Government Advisory Committee, or GAC for short (like the sound you make when you think about wading chin-deep into ICANN's organization structure).

The GAC advises ICANN on the legal aspects of ICANN policy, especially as it relates to national laws and international agreements. But they are not a decision-making body. But on the other hand, the ICANN board does have to pay special attention to GAC advice even if they don't have to abide by it.

.xxx and nGTLDs

In theory, this all sounds good, but in practice, ICANN's multi-stakeholder model has suffered a couple of challenges. There are two primary instances in which ICANN's multi-stakeholder model has been put to the test to date and, in both cases, they involved going against the wishes of a government.

The first was in regards to the sponsored TLD .xxx, which was created by and for the adult entertainment industry.

Despite strong objections to the creation of the .xxx TLD, most especially from world governments indepdently and through the GAC, ICANN ultimately proceeded with its decision to delegate the TLD.

Foreign governments, among which apparently was the European Commission, then lobbied the US government to override the decision of the ICANN board and disallow .xxx from being added to the root.

The IANA contract would have allowed the US to unilaterally block .xxx from being delegated, but they did not do so.

The second is in regards to new gTLDs.

Ardent followers of this page are no doubt intimately familiar with the comings and goings of new gTLDs, but on the eve of its introduction, ICANN was awash with criticism, primarily from copyright and trademark protection firms,  who managed to lobby the US Senate and the House of Representatives to take up the issue in a series of hearings. The US Congress then asked the Department of Commerce to intervene to slow down the new gTLD program, going so far as to request ICANN's contract be reviewed.

In the end, though, none of the objections were founded, though the DoC did find fault with ICANN for not communicating better and educating the public more on the almost seven years of work that went into creating a new gTLD program that would have consumer protections and trademark violation mitigation processes baked in.

The lesson of these two challenges to ICANN's multi-stakeholder model is that both for objections raised regarding .xxx and for objections to the new TLD program, the final appeal came down to the US Department of Commerce and both times the DoC refused to intervene. In other words, when governments, whether the US government or other world governments sought to intervene in ICANN's decision-making process, it was precisely to the DoC and the power to revoke ICANN's contract that they made their appeals.

And now it is exactly this contract which has expired and IANA functions will soon devolve directly to ICANN.

But more importantly, whatever the outcome, Jon Postel already demonstrated in 1998 that authority over IANA functions does not rest with the US Department of Commerce contract but in the internet community itself. ICANN is the best attempt so far at capturing all the voices of that community and to rule by its founding principle: practical, common-sense, consensus-based decision-making.

However, it's clear in the two highest-profile challenges to the authority of ICANN's multi-stakeholder model that ICANN was most susceptible, for better or for worse, to influence from world governments through its contract with the US Department of Commerce.

ICANN must be a little preoccupied this month.

All September, only seven TLDs were delegated to the root zone, among which five were brand TLDs, leaving only just two true gTLDs.

So we'll keep it short and sweet this month.

.wowSeptember 26

Out of three applicants that also included Google and United TLD Holdco Ltd., who submitted a Public Interest Commitment (no it did not pertain to World of Warcraft), it was Amazon's application that won out in the end.

.通販 (.xn--gk3at1e) — September 30

Meaning "online shopping," .通販 (pronounced "tsuhan") was the last gTLD delegated by ICANN under the IANA contract with the US government, so it seems almost fitting, maybe to the point of irony, that it was an IDN.

Amazon also won out for .通販, despite GAC objections related to utilizing this TLD to possibly monopolize online shopping.

For the record, those five brand TLDs that were delegated were the following:


So you can also look out for domains in those TLDs coming to a browser near you (although if .monster had been a true generic it would have been great for Halloween). Stay tuned for more updates on recently-delegated TLDs next month.

As always, these two TLDs are on the bleeding edge of the new TLD program. We don't know yet how they'll be rolled out to the market, so we can't say for sure whether we'll be offering them at Gandi. We'll try our best, though.

For vloggers and voyuers and photography enthusiasts, a new TLD is now entering the Sunrise phase. Starting on October 5 at 5:00 PM PDT, .cam enters the Sunrise phase, when it will be available for $281.62 per year at A rates*.

Otherwise, from December 12 until December 14, .cam will be available in the Landrush phase for $571.66 per year at A rates*.

And finally, .cam enters the GoLive phase on December 14 at 2:00 AM PST, when it will be available for just $40.25 per year at A rates*.

Get your .cam?


*Prices in USD. See .cam price page for local prices.

Page   1 2 3 46 7 8
Change the news ticker size