[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Auction of last resort and Private Resolutions

[Rubens Kuhl]

> On 29 Jun 2020, at 13:26, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com> wrote:
> 
> I am in favor of more or less the status quo.  I don't think any real problem was proved in the last round, to support changing the rules this time.  It is better (more efficient, fast and fair) for everyone to play by the same rules we are accustomed to, rather than change them to benefit a few, very vocal members of this WG.

Mike,

It's more than a few vocal members connected to a single incumbent registry. As for the last round, what happened after application speaks for itself in the possibility of fostering a nefarious business model in subsequent procedures.
People might have not figured that out during 2012 application phase, but they learned quickly and now can use that knowledge prior to the next round.

The possible detrimental effect to the program's image as a whole just can't be ignored; that's the angle that worries me, not specific effects on specific applicants. In a way, the collection of money thru private auctions to focus on specific string(s) could be seen as a consortium of uncooperative applicants to raise money to fight the incumbents.Kinda a raffle.

The problem is that the outside perception won't be as forgiving as calling it a raffle; harsher words will be used, and we might see ourselves with a new issue of interest to California Attorney General or other regulators.

Which brings me to a new idea: moving forward with the transparency idea, could ICANN preemptively provide the private resolution details to a willing regulator, like CAG or FTC ? This would bring the risk to gamers to a whole new level.


Rubens

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 529 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200629/f637d478/signature.asc>