Those who want the UK to remain in the EU will see this as just one damaging consequence of the UK's decision to leave. Conversely, Brexiteers will see this as an example of maladministration by an EU bureaucracy, and another demonstration of why the UK needs to exit. Sadly, there will be no consensus.
Putting aside the politics, this seems like a very poor decision. Historically, I believe most registering authorities have made great efforts to grandfather-in prior domains, for practical reasons apparent to most visitors of this site.
Additionally, shoddy treatment of 10% of current registrees will do nothing to increase the perceived value of an .eu domain. I also note that it appears the EU commission didn't even discuss the policy with the company that manages the .eu domain:
That's a fair comment. I hadn't considered that perspective.
I'm aware of several TLDs that require evidence of residency/trade within the geographic region for the purpose of registration, but I don't think any of them require it in perpetuity for renewals; it's this that seems problematic to me. In principle, URLs are based on a degree of immutability: saying that a domain name must change when circumstances change seems at odds with the architectural fundamentals of the web, in which case I question the value of establishing a .eu domain at all.
This doesn't seem to immediately affect existing registrations, so they can renew for up to ten years before the withdrawal date, and start redirecting people to some other domain.
... as of the withdrawal date ... the Registry for .eu will be entitled to revoke such domain name on its own initiative and without submitting the dispute to any extrajudicial settlement of conflicts ...
Comments
Those who want the UK to remain in the EU will see this as just one damaging consequence of the UK's decision to leave. Conversely, Brexiteers will see this as an example of maladministration by an EU bureaucracy, and another demonstration of why the UK needs to exit. Sadly, there will be no consensus.
Putting aside the politics, this seems like a very poor decision. Historically, I believe most registering authorities have made great efforts to grandfather-in prior domains, for practical reasons apparent to most visitors of this site.
Additionally, shoddy treatment of 10% of current registrees will do nothing to increase the perceived value of an .eu domain. I also note that it appears the EU commission didn't even discuss the policy with the company that manages the .eu domain:
https://eurid.eu/en/news/ec-releases-communication-concernin...
It does for me. Creates the image of an exclusive TLD with only genuine, trustable EU registrees.
That's a fair comment. I hadn't considered that perspective.
I'm aware of several TLDs that require evidence of residency/trade within the geographic region for the purpose of registration, but I don't think any of them require it in perpetuity for renewals; it's this that seems problematic to me. In principle, URLs are based on a degree of immutability: saying that a domain name must change when circumstances change seems at odds with the architectural fundamentals of the web, in which case I question the value of establishing a .eu domain at all.
It's also leading to mistrust from the registrar side: will my .eu be cancelled when politics get harsh?
This doesn't seem to immediately affect existing registrations, so they can renew for up to ten years before the withdrawal date, and start redirecting people to some other domain.
I don't think that is true.
From section 2 of the commission's notice:
... as of the withdrawal date ... the Registry for .eu will be entitled to revoke such domain name on its own initiative and without submitting the dispute to any extrajudicial settlement of conflicts ...
Entitled, but not required. I guess if some EU company shares the same name and disputes the domain, the UK holder might lose it.