[bc-gnso] Registry/Registrar Separation
Liz Williams
lizawilliams at mac.com
Thu Oct 29 08:57:55 UTC 2009
Hello everyone
I agree with Mikey -- there is more nuance here and we certainly don't
want to be making long term structural changes without rigourous
understanding.
I suggested in the public forum today that, given that ownership
arrangements are part of registry/registrar contracts and that those
conditions are within the purview of the PDP process, that we should
recommend a proper policy development exercise.
If we did it right, we would hear all points of view, have additional
information from experts AND reach a set of recommendations to advise
the Board.
Liz
On 29 Oct 2009, at 02:56, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> um...
>
> i think there's more nuance there.
>
> the reason i started registering domain names in 1993 was because i
> wanted my own email domain. i tried to get oconnor.com but it was
> taken. so i settled for haven.com instead.
>
> many years later, i finally got my name in a domain name --
> oconnor.pro. so i'm an example of a guy who hand-registered a name
> in a new gTLD that i couldn't get in an existing one.
> unfortunately, right after i got that name, i accidentally sold that
> first domain (haven.com) for a boatload of money and wound up
> retiring from the ".pro" world. life's funny that way...
>
> sure, there's money to be made in premium name auctions and
> monitization. but a LOT of people will ALSO be able to get names
> that they can't get otherwise. there's room for both, methinks. i
> truly don't think the actors in this drama are evil, they're just
> approaching the problem from a different point of view. the
> conversation that's visible by email during the Seoul meeting
> convinces me that we're getting better at seeing those different
> points of view and coming to constructive agreements that can meet
> the needs of all. we're not great at it yet, but we're getting
> better. let's keep working on that.
>
> mikey
>
>
> On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:37 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote:
>
>> (for those of you not here in Seoul)
>> Below is what I said (not on behalf of BC) today at the Public
>> Forum, regarding Rr/Ry separation.
>>
>> I Listened to debate over separation. inconclusive (both sides
>> passionate and articulate)
>>> But I did learn about motivations for Registrars wanting to run
>>> Registries
>>>
>>> I learned about innovative methods for monetizing premium names.
>>
>> What I learned tells me ICANN should reset public expectations
>> about benefits of new TLDs.
>>> Let’s start being more transparent about the way names will and
>>> won’t be available to the public.
>>>
>>> Let’s limit disappointment when TLDs launch.
>>>
>>> And let’s make it less likely that the review team on
>>> Competition , Consumer Trust, and Choice will give ICANN a failing
>>> grade.
>>
>> For years, the Rhetoric of expectations has been: we need new TLDs
>> to give registrants all those “good names that are unavailable in
>> current TLDs.
>> That’s the rhetoric. What’s the reality?
>>> Reality 1: new gTLD applicants will maximize profits on premium
>>> names, whether by selling them at diff prices, or by having an
>>> affiliate park the domain with advertising. That name is never
>>> going be available to a registrant that wants to use it for
>>> content or commerce.
>>>
>>> Reality 2: will see Innovative ways to identify and control
>>> premium names at launch, and then afterwards, when words and
>>> phrases suddenly acquire premium value ( h1n1.whatever)
>>
>> There’s Nothing illegal about that, and new Ry contracts allow
>> uncapped and variable premium pricing. And you don’t have to own a
>> registrar to monetize your names – I’ve been educated about that.
>>
>> But let’s stop kidding ourselves and the internet public about how
>> new TLDs will let ordinary people register names they want but
>> can’t get today.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve DelBianco
>> Executive Director
>> NetChoice
>> http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org
>> +1.202.420.7482
>>
>
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone 651-647-6109
> fax 866-280-2356
> web www.haven2.com
> handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,
> Google, etc.)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20091029/a5d63798/attachment.html>
More information about the Bc-gnso
mailing list