I wouldn't call it scam as I am not surprised at their exorbitant prices
considering the cost involved in getting the TLDs initially

However, at the same time, I will call it a scam especially as .sucks is
just 1 out of the many strings in the root. So there is always freedom of
choice ;-)

Cheers!

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 16 Mar 2015 17:33, "Carlos A. Afonso" <[log in to unmask]> 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
>