<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial>
I believe that ICA took the position that the separation requirement could be relaxed for closed registries where DNs could not be obtained by the general public - e.g., .acmecorp where registry only open to employees, suppliers, etc. That could of course be combined with a numerical limit. <br><br>The potential problem with just a numerical limit is that a registry operator for a premium generic could choose to cap registrations just under the limit to create artificial scarcity and then operate the registrar function at high annual fees. <br>The purpose of separation for open gTLDs is to have registrar competition that keeps prices to registrants low. This is arguably one of ICANN's most successful policies. Relaxing it should be done with great caution.
<br>Philip S. Corwin
<br>Partner, Butera & Andrews
<br>1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
<br>Suite 500
<br>Washington, DC 20004
<br>2026635347/Office
<br>2022556172/Cell
<br>
<br>"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey </font></div>
<br><div><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
<font face=Tahoma size=2>
<b>From</b>: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org <owner-bc-gnso@icann.org>
<br><b>To</b>: Michael D. Palage <michael@palage.com>
<br><b>Cc</b>: 'BC gnso' <bc-gnso@icann.org>
<br><b>Sent</b>: Fri Jul 31 14:01:02 2009<br><b>Subject</b>: Re: [bc-gnso] RE: Important--Regsitry Registrar Separation issue
<br></font><br></div>
<grin><div><br></div><div>if we presume that <b>somebody</b> is going to make a lot of money off of those premium generics, i'm not sure i care whether it's the registrar or the registry... </div><div><br></div><div>m</div><div><br><div><div>On Jul 31, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Michael D. Palage wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Mike,<br><br>Not to sound like an attorney but please read the ICANN proposal "fine<br>print". Under the current proposal a Registrar would be able to register up<br>to 100,000 in a TLD in which they or an affiliate were the registry<br>operator. Do you want to take a bet on what percentage of those 100,000 with<br>be premium generics?<br><br><br>"With a limited exception, a registrar should not sell domain services of an<br>affiliated registry. This limit is set to a certain threshold, in this<br>model, 100,000 domain names. (The registrar may continue to manage its<br>existing base of registrations once the threshold is met)" See<br><a href="http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/regy-regr-separation-18feb09-en.pdf">http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/regy-regr-separation-18feb09-en.pdf</a><br><br>Best regards,<br><br>Michael<br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of<br>Mike O'Connor<br>Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 1:22 PM<br>To: BC gnso<br>Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] RE: Important--Regsitry Registrar Separation issue<br><br><br>hi all,<br><br>i don't feel very strongly about this. times have changed from the <br>days when there was one monopoly provider being broken up. now there <br>are lots of strong/capable entities that have the income statement, <br>technical expertise and customer-facing capabilities to run registrars <br>and registries.<br><br>so i'm not sure we need to throw our collective body on the tracks in <br>the way of that train. especially when they're saying that a <br>registrar can't be a registry for the same TLD.<br><br>my 2 cents,<br><br>m<br><br><br>On Jul 30, 2009, at 3:43 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">I sent this around about five weeks ago, and other than George I do <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">not<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">believe anyone has commented. I have been asked if the BC has a <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">view on<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">this issue. It seems like a big issue with respect to new TLDs, and <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">could<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">be retroapplied to existing TLDs. Does anyone else care?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">My view is that the proponents of the change (abolishing the <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">longstanding<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">rule of separation) ought to have a fairly heavy burden to prove the <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">need<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">for the change. I have not seen a very good case for it, and think <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">www.registryregistrarseparation.org website presents a compelling case<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">against it. I also am bothered that Staff seemed to unilaterally<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">incorporate such a radical change into the Draft Applicant Guidebook,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">without any formal direction to do so. So I hope they change it <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">back in the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">next iteration, due in September. If the BC is fairly unanimous on <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">this<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">issue, then I would like us to make comments to that effect very soon.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Please let me know what you think.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">I summarized the factual situation in a recent blog post on <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">NameSmash.com:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">NEW TLDs -- CONCERNS ABOUT REGISTRY-REGISTRAR SEPARATION<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">ICANN was formed eleven years ago, when the .com 'monopoly' was broken<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">apart.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">At that time, Network Solutions was the sole registry and registrar <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">of gTLD<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">domain names. ICANN created the system we have today, where <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">registrants<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">place orders with ICANN-accredited registrars, who in turn place the <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">orders<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">with ICANN-contracted TLD registries, many of which use the back-end<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">services of third party registry operators. It was thought that <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">this system<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">would increase competition for the suppliers of domain names, and <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">thus lower<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">prices for registrants. It is hard to argue that this has not held <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">true,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">insofar as the price of .com domain names has dropped dramatically <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">in that<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">time (but is now allowed to rise again by 7% almost every year, <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">under the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">2006 agreement between ICANN and VeriSign).<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">To ensure this structure held, ICANN restricted registries from <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">acquiring<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">directly or indirectly a substantial percentage of any registrar, so<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">VeriSign cannot buy a controlling interest in GoDaddy, for example. <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Some of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the largest registrars have become registry operators which also <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">register<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">those TLD names to the public. For example GoDaddy provides the <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">registry<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">for country-code .me (so Montenegro makes the rules, not ICANN). <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Other<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">large registrars, such as Network Solutions and eNom, now are <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">pressing ICANN<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">to eliminate the restrictions on registry-registrar cross ownership <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">of gTLD<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">registries, so that those registrars can compete as registry <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">businesses,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">sell new gTLD domains directly to the public, and sell them to all <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">other<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">ICANN accredited registrars as well.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Existing registry operators, such as NeuStar (.biz), Public Interest<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Registry (.org) and others, are in support of any entity becoming a <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">registry<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">or registry operator, so long as that entity does not distribute <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">domain<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">names in the same TLD that they operate as a registry. They are <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">fighting<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">this new proposal on the basis that registrars have a substantial <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">head start<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">in marketing domain names to the public, and thus can offer prime<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">distribution opportunities to new registries. These registries and <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">registry<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">operators argue that allowing cross ownership would put them at a<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">competitive disadvantage in convincing new TLD operators to use their<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">back-end services.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On the other hand, some large registrars argue that no registrar or <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">registry<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">business -- other than VeriSign with .com and .net -- has any <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">'market power'<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">which can be exploited for anti-competitive purposes, and thus they <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">ought<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">not be regulated by cross-ownership restrictions. They note that, <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">absent<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">proven 'market power', it is in consumers' interests to allow<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">cross-ownership because it will bring operational efficiencies and <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">lower<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">prices to the marketplace. The registries counter that a number <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">registrars<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">do in fact have market power in deciding which TLDs to promote, and <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">how.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">They argue that a registrar that owns a registry will choose to <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">promote its<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">own cross-owned TLDs over any non-affiliated TLD, thereby actually <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">reducing<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">competition.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">A public comment forum concerning antitrust experts' reports on this <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">issue<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">has recently closed,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">http://forum.icann.org/lists/competition-pricing-final/, and ICANN <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">staff is<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">expected to make recommendations which then will be subject to further<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">public debate and comment before the next iteration of the new TLD <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Applicant<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Guidebook, expected in late September.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Mike Rodenbaugh<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Rodenbaugh Law<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">548 Market Street<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">San Francisco, CA 94104<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">+1.415.738.8087<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">www.rodenbaugh.com<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">-----Original Message-----<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com]<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2009 12:39 AM<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">To: bc-gnso@icann.org<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Subject: FW: Important--Regsitry Registrar Separation issue<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">FYI the site at www.registryregistrarseparation.org. I know this <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">issue is<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">of serious concern to many members.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Adam Palmer and Jeff Neuman have agree to present briefly and take <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">questions<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">at our BC meeting on Tuesday.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">All comments welcome, and it would be wonderful if a member or two <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">wanted to<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">lead the BC thinking and engagement on this issue.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Thanks,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Mike<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Mike Rodenbaugh<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Rodenbaugh Law<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">548 Market Street<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">San Francisco, CA 94104<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">+1.415.738.8087<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">www.rodenbaugh.com<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">-----Original Message-----<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">From: Adam Palmer [mailto:APalmer@pir.org]<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 5:51 PM<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">To: Adam Palmer<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Important--Regsitry Registrar Separation issue<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">All,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Please see the below site on registry/registrar cross ownership. <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">ICANN will<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">also be having a panel on this on Monday. Strong vocal support is <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">welcome<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">both on the website and at the ICANN Monday panel meeting.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Please forward this site link to anyone else that might support our <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">concerns<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">on this issue.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Let me know if any questions.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Thanks,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Adam Palmer<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Link: http://www.registryregistrarseparation.org/supporters<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><br>- - - - - - - - -<br>phone <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>651-647-6109<br>fax <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>866-280-2356<br>web <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>www.haven2.com<br>handle<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, <br>Google, etc.)<br><br></div></blockquote></div><br><div apple-content-edited="true"> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>- - - - - - - - -</div><div>phone<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>651-647-6109 </div><div>fax <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>866-280-2356 </div><div>web<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span><a href="http://www.haven2.com">www.haven2.com</a></div><div>handle<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)</div></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span> </div><br></div></body></html>