<nettime> ICANN watch: RealNames goes bust, MS, Verisign

["nettime's_roving_reporter" <nettime@bbs.thing.net>]

     [<http://icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=732&mode=thread&order=0>,
      including some comments; via [tbyfield@panix.com>]

   Alternate Roots 

     RealNames plays Unreal

     Posted by tbyfield on Saturday, May 11 @ 18:22:56 MDT
     Contributed by tbyfield

   According to Newsbytes,[1] RealNames, the first major contender to
   provide an "alternative" to DNS, is set to shut its doors within a
   matter of weeks. *[Updated Sun May 12 09:45:09 EDT 2002]*

   The report states that the proximate cause is the decision by
   Microsoft not to renew its contract, which expired in March, with
   RealNames.

     [1] http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176525.html

   While it's sad to see another "innovator" go down the tubes, it's
   worth noting that RealNames's odyssey was (imo) not one of the better
   trends in the history of the politics of naming. Let's revisit a bit
   of that history.

   RealNames's approach was, in essence, to interpret the domain name
   system itself as damage and route around it. Unlike later companies
   working in this nebulous terrain, such as New.net (which was born in
   part in response to ICANN's whimso-tyrannical approach to new TLDs),
   RealNames's interest seemingly had *nothing* to do with any issues of
   equity, freedom of speech, or expansion of the properly so-called
   namespace. Instead, it sought to provide a service that would extend
   into the "space" of the URL the payola-like logic of paid-for search
   engine rankings, which were then beginning to seriously distort the
   main "navigational" alternatives to DNS. The basic idea was fairly
   simple: use the URL field of a browser to intercept user input and
   substitute "real" names -- bought from RealNames -- to guide them into
   a completely privatized namespace.

   Not surprisingly, RealNames's first big customer in May 1998 was the
   search engine Altavista, which at that point was going downhill fast,
   propelled by the weight of all manner of encumbrances. The rub?
   According to NTK,[2] RealNames was paying Altavista, not vice versa.

     [2] http://www.ntk.net/index.cgi?b=01998-05-22&l=86

   Less surprising in a way, but more alarming in others, was RealNames's
   next big client, Microsoft, whose tendency to detourn open standards
   has been widely noted. The two companies closed a contract in March
   2000, and RealNames "keywords" became yet another mechanism by which
   MS tried to wean "its" users away from the internet. Hence, for
   example, the rather remarkable double-plus-doublespeak of a 7 June 200
   RealNames press release issued in defense of MS:

     According to Keith Teare, founder and CEO of RealNames Corporation,
     "Has anybody considered what this [the US Government's decision to
     prosecute Microsoft and the court's decision to break up the
     company] means for Microsoft's partners and the future of
     technology? RealNames is a start-up with technologies that improve
     the Internet experience for consumers through a natural language
     navigation system, using Internet Keywords *instead of lengthy web
     addresses.* Microsoft embraced our open standards-based architecture
     in March 2000 because it makes perfect sense for consumers to use
     Internet Keywords *within MSN and Internet Explorer.* [Emphasis
     added.]

   That was then. Now that this happy symbiosis has come to an end,
   RealNames's founder, CEO, *and* Board Chair, Keith Teare is taking a
   much less benign view of Microsoft's relationship to language. The
   disgruntled former employee puts it quite bluntly on his personal
   website:[3] "*I am sure that Microsoft will do an excellent job of
   misinforming the public about the reasons for this decision and so I
   want to put the record straight*" (emphasis added). But Microsoft isn't
   "misinforming" people, Mr. Teare -- they're merely *redirecting* them.

     [3] http://www.teare.com/default.htm

   In the same statement, Teare nods to the fact that VeriSign (a
   RealNames investor, it seems) "had just [as of 6 December 2001[4]?]
   committed to a plan to give every com, net and org customer 5 free
   promotional Keywords for 30 days." *Say what?* Verisign, the
   Ueber-registry, was planning to subvert transparent user-to-resource
   connection *at the level of the URL field in browsers?* Indeed. As
   Verisign explains it:

     [4] http://www.realnames.com/body/pressreleases/pr_120601.asp

     A perfect complement to domain names, [RealNames'] Keywords are Web
     addresses consisting of natural language names (e.g., "The New York
     Times") that work automatically *in the Microsoft Internet Explorer
     browser* without entering prefixes ("www") or extensions (".com"),
     redirecting the user to a predetermined Web site or a specific page
     within that Web site. [Emphasis added.]

   Of course, prepending the hostname "www." and appending the TLD ".com"
   to whatever someone types into a URL field is now a standard feature
   that many people have come to rely on. Naturally, then, it makes
   perfect sense for Verisign to align itself with Microsoft by
   *substituting* something else for what someone types and "*redirecting*
   the user to a predetermined" -- that is, non-DNS-based -- "Web site."

   That, in itself, is dubious enough, but this broadening of scope has
   potentially serious consequences, as Verisign happily acknowledges.
   Its premium (i.e., expensive) RealNames-based offering, "Keyword
   Review," "help[s] deter cyber-squatting" -- of words that are ***not***
   domain names. What John Gilmore rightly denounced[5] as the "congenital
   confusion between trademarks and domain names" was bad enough; but, as
   many critics of this confusion have been predicting for years (this
   one included[6]), we now see "cybersquatting" applied to language other
   than domain names merely because its context -- a browser's URL field
   -- is the same. (For a reductio ad absurdum of this, see
   Futurefeedforward's increasingly probable spoof[7] of a new Microsoft
   Word feature circa 2011.)

    [5] http://www.icann.org/comments-mail/comment-ip/msg00025.html
    [6] http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_3/byfield/index.html
    [7] http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0203/msg00164.html

   Under the circumstances, it's hard to shed tears over Microsoft's
   shedding of Teare and RealNames. Unfortunately, as one of the MS
   employees said (according to scribe's notes Teare has published[8]) in
   the 7 May meeting where MS broke the bad news to RealNames, "we need
   to separate the people from the IP--IP is the asset, people are free
   agents." In other words, RealNames may be going away, but this
   redirection/substitution technique surely won't. Now that MS has
   pulled the plug on RN, it's interesting to speculate what MS -- and
   Versign -- might have up their respective sleeves. Aside from ".net",
   of course.

     [8] http://www.teare.com/scribe.htm

   One ICANN Watch contributor puts it thusly:

     According to this Newsbyte article, Realnames, a company that sold
     keyword names which worked in the IE browser is closing up shop due
     to Microsofts' decision not to renew their exclusive contract with
     Realnames. Yet another reason not to make your business reliant on
     M$.


[...comment section...]

<...>

   Re: RealNames plays Unreal (Score: 1)
   by fnord (d_d@email.com) on Saturday, May 11 @ 20:15:38 MDT
   (User Info)
   F---edcompany.com carried this[9] a week ago:

     [9] http://comments.fuckedcompany.com/phpcomments/index.php?newsid=86419&sid=1&page=1&parentid=0&crapfilter=1

     Fake
     RealNames
     Rumor has it RealNames' contract with Microsoft, the only way its
     crappy keywords work, expires today. Oh and... and their $30
     million debt with microsoft comes due today too... Looks like
     bankruptcy in the midst.....
     When: May 03 2002 12:00AM
     Company: RealNames

   I didn't report on it at the time as it was near impossible to figure
   out which of many contracts with Micro$oft might have been expiring,
   or which loan might have been due, Micro$oft had invested $70m at one
   point. Fsckedco has been known to be wrong before, or at least
   premature (about new.net for example[10]).

     [10] http://icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=732&mode=thread&order=0

   Veri$ign also had a 10% stake in RealNames, with an option to go to
   20% which they never exercised. The interesting thing to watch now is
   what becomes of the assets? It is already integrated in Micro$oft's
   Internet Explorer web browser, it might well cost more to take it out
   than leave it in. Veri$ign's IDN[11] (internationalized domain name)
   service also used RealNames technology. One can imagine either or both
   of these behemoths picking over the remains. While the company may be
   dead I suspect the technology will live on, and perhaps even grow.

     [11] http://corporate.verisign.com/news/2001/pr_20010620.html

   As to why they failed, in addition to the reasons given, I mean, come
   on, 80 employees (and that after prior layoffs)? One could get away
   with that before the dotcom crash but that was long ago. The only
   surprise is that they've lasted till now. And like many once rising
   dotcom stars who crashed and burned, they also failed in their
   execution. I registered a RealName when they first came out. They
   pre-screened each name and wouldn't allow actual words, eg: auction,
   because then a single site would have a monopoly on that term. A year
   later I got a renewal notice that was so poorly written I couldn't
   figure out what I was required to do. I then got another notice saying
   I should disregard the previous one, with no further explanation. That
   was the end of my use of RealNames, nor have I since used them in a
   browser to go anywhere. They also got into hot water for reversing
   their stand on words and selling KeyWord 'books' to Amazon.com for a
   pile of money. There was a hue and cry about that and I don't now
   recall whether they backed down. They just never seemed to get their
   act together.

   They really had a golden opportunity, particularily with IDN (as true
   IDN in the DNS is years away, if ever), but they fumbled the ball, and
   this despite the backing and leverage of two near monopolies in
   crucial areas. If either/both of them assume more direct control of
   the technology, it may be too soon to count it out entirely. -g

<...>

   Re: RealNames plays Unreal (Score: 1)
   by fnord (d_d@email.com) on Sunday, May 12 @ 08:19:09 MDT
   (User Info)
   Keith Teare, founder and former head of RealNames, speaks[12] out on the
   plug being pulled. Some interesting bits:

     [12] http://www.teare.com/default.htm

     VeriSign had just committed to a plan to give every com, net and
     org customer 5 free promotional Keywords for 30 days. This would
     have resulted in widespread awareness and great revenue boost.

   I don't see this as a panacea. That would have required that most of
   them would be very obscure keywords, hence little traffic. And even
   less revenue.

     We [MicroSoft] do not believe in "Naming", we believe in search.
     This is because we control search 100% whereas we could never
     control naming. Some of us believe search results are a better
     experience than navigation through naming. Sure the URL and the DNS
     are broken, but to fix it is a big job with no clear reward for
     Microsoft.

   I fail to see how Microsoft controls search 100%, even using Internet
   Explorer and MSN search (as is now displayed when one types a
   non-existent domain name using IE's URL line). While Microsoft has
   some control over search rankings, and could assume more by either
   screening each submission like Yahoo, or going to a pay for placement
   model like overture.com, it still wouldn't be 100%. Those not liking
   the results would use another search engine, and both screening and
   pay for placement results fall far short of using relevance algorithms
   as Google does. AOL recently replaced its use of Overture for
   searching with Google, for example. I can't see even Microsoft trying
   a stunt where IE wouldn't resolve google.com or yahoo.com.

     The only naming technology in the world capable of allowing
     non-ASCII characters to be used as web addresses is being killed at
     birth - before it succeeds and becomes "out of control".

   At birth (1998) is a bit of a stretch even without internet time. It
   also isn't the only non-ASCII naming technology, walid.com is one of
   the others.

     Now, Bill Bliss - who runs MSN Search and was until recently in
     charge of the RealNames relationship, has in the last few weeks
     been moved to "Natural Language Platforms" and is charged with
     developing a variant of our system. The browser is now back under
     Microsoft's control and it is possible that - having learned much
     from RealNames - it will develop its own version of our resolution
     service.

   Which is what I said here earlier. This may not allow MicroSoft 100%
   control, but it gives them more control. IE is the default browser for
   a majority (putatively 88%) of the world's users. The percentage in
   non-primarily English speaking countries is probably at least that
   high. Functional, though faux, IDN resolution would give MicroSoft yet
   another near monopoly. In practical terms, that's close enough. Indeed
   it is probably better than having a 100% monopoly as it slows down the
   regulators.

     What is shared cannot be controlled.

   Microsoft, and ICANN, understand that one very well. And MicroSoft has
   been at it far longer and now has a massive head start on IDN
   resolution. Be afraid... -g

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net