Yes we (I) do, and unlimited freedom to create gTLDs should

1) tell the suckers (there is no reason to sugar coat this) that you 
can't buy yourself out of criticism

and

2) prevent exorbitant prices for users who want to gleefully spew on 
their most hatred brand of product.

So, yes. It's not only considered, it's the basis for my support for 
unlimited gTLDs.

Nicolas

On 16/03/2015 12:32 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> Do we consider this type of scam when some (most?) of us defend absolute
> freedom for creating new gTLDs?
>
> --c.a.
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: [ PFIR ]  Extortion runs wild on .sucks gTLD
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 08:28:08 -0700
> From: PFIR (People For Internet Responsibility) Announcement List
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: PFIR (People For Internet Responsibility) Announcement List
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Extortion runs wild on .sucks gTLD
>
> ".sucks" registrations begin soon--at up to $2,500 per domain
>
> (Ars):
> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/03/sucks-tld-to-accept-sunrise-registrations-soon-but-theyll-be-pricey/
>
>       The number of generic top-level domains (gTLDs) available for use has
>       climbed into the hundreds, and ".sucks" will soon be added to the
>       list. However, angry customers eager to get their hands on
>       brand-specific domains like "bestbuy.sucks" or "comcast.sucks"
>       shouldn't get their hopes up; according to MarketingLand, the domains
>       will cost far more than most consumers will want to pay.  The pricing
>       situation around .sucks domain names is complicated. Companies with
>       registered trademarks will have to pay an astounding $2,499 to
>       register their trademarked names in .sucks. Registration of
>       non-trademarked names during the "sunrise" period (March 30 until June
>       1) before .sucks goes live will cost at least $199 per name, while the
>       standard registration fee after June 1 rises to $249 per name.
>
>       Companies are typically hyper-sensitive about brand usage, and
>       few will want their .sucks domains under someone else's control.
>       The .sucks pricing scheme has led to outrage from many quarters,
>       with MarketingLand's writeup quoting several industry figures who
>       use words like "extortion" and "predatory."
>
>   - - -
>
> This is one of the best examples I know of demonstrating how the gTLD
> expansion has turned into one giant extortion scheme for the
> enrichment of "domainers" and the rest of the domain-industrial
> complex -- and to the detriment of the Net at large. As far as the
> overwhelmingly vast majority of new gTLDs is concerned, I've seen
> nothing from them but spam and phishing attempts, and I block them
> from my networks with zero sense of shame and without any obvious
> detrimental effects here. Personally, I recommend that you do the
> same.
>
> --Lauren--
> Lauren Weinstein ([log in to unmask]): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
> Founder:
>   - Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
>   - PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com/privacy-info
> Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility:
> http://www.pfir.org/pfir-info
> Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
> Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
> Google+: http://google.com/+LaurenWeinstein
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
> Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> pfir mailing list
> http://lists.pfir.org/mailman/listinfo/pfir