Google: only paranoid because everyone's out to get it
But only after it was made clear that it probably wouldn't be granted the right to manage the .search generic top level domain name which it applied for last year. Sigh!
As things stood ICANN, which wants to expand the generic top level domain name system, was rightly worried that top level domain name ownership of .search might grant too much control and power to Google (which is already felt by many to have far too much) and that would run against the whole concept of the new top level names being managed in the broader interests of the Internet.
So to head off this objection, Google is proposing a dotless domain for search with a difference. Search queries would be composed thus: [http://search/searchterm] with the specific search service pre-specified by the user.
Google is proposing that it should then run a redirect service to ensure the search ends up with the right search provider. Search providers just register themselves to Google's redirect service online.
Many, of course, are suspicious of Google's motives. What could it be up to?
Of course! Running the redirect service would give it even more data on search - who searches for what on what service.
The proposals for generic TLDs are controversial and ICANN hasn't yet assigned any names at all, much less given Google .search.More Google: the search giant may also be in hot water with European Commission as some of its worst enemies file a complaint over its alleged anti-competitive practices. According to the Fairsearch pressure group (Microsoft , Nokia, Oracle and others) Google is guilty of unfairly hogging the search market on the desktop and now in mobile by dint of its control of the Android operating system.
They allege that the company entices vendors by making the OS available below cost and then exploits its position to lock out its competitors in search and advertising,
To which Google's reply (especially to Microsoft which was hauled before the EU on similar grounds in the 1990s) is probably,"...and your point is?"