<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: [bc-gnso] Promoting the market efficiencies of
vertica</title></head><body>
<div>I used to have a professor at Stanford who used the phrase
"utter rubbish" when he came across something he didn't
agree with.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>It's sad that the source of this utter rubbish is a Stanford
professor. It totally misses the point of why silos are bad and
layers are good in our generation of telecommunications.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Since 1983, we in the US have been making a transition from a
completely vertically integrated telecom monopoly to a horizontally
layered Internet communications system that is immensely more
diversified, efficient, technologically advanced and competitive than
anything that existed in the years of the Bell System.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Just ask yourself about the five best innovations in
telecommunications in the last five years - take your pick - would any
of them been successful if they didn't have one or more layers of the
Internet stack to use as a platform for launching their chunk of
innovation?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Internet entrepreneurs today will look for and exploit market
niches, and once established, do their best to differentiate their
products both vertically and horizontally in order to maximize
profits. Sometimes this works and sometimes it doesn't.
All too frequently, the niche closes before they breakeven! But
VI is pretty incidental to other economic factors.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>So I don't think this particular bit of "rubbish" is
much help to our own discussions on VI. </div>
<div><br></div>
<div>- Mike Roberts</div>
<div> Darwin Group</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>As a communications counselor, I am
always looking for analogies to help aid the understanding of complex
problems. I view VI at ICANN as one such complex problem.
A report from the Technology Policy Institute may be the analogy.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>The Institute, a think tank focused on
the economics of innovation and change (and headed by U.S. Senate
runner-up, Carly Fiorina), has issued a report promoting vertical
integration as "inherent" in efficient markets. Here
is the link to the press release (with a link to the report embedded):
<a
href="http://www.techpolicyinstitute.org/news/show/23247.html"
>http://www.techpolicyinstitute.org/news/show/23247.html</a></blockquote
>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>There are arguable differences between
the open markets addressed by the report and the noblesse oblige of
ICANN with regard to domain names, but I thought the article was
provocative enough to add to the mix.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>It may all be beside the point, of
course, if Kurt Pritz was to be believed at our meeting in Washington,
D.C. He said ICANN does not want to have to monitor
exceptions.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Cheers,</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Berard</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>