[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Why does ICANN continue to ignore advice it received from the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division – it should use competitive bidding rather than granting the incumbent operator a perpetual right to renew without competition

Don Smith dsmith7622 at yahoo.com
Wed Feb 12 21:28:01 UTC 2020

--- In particular, competitive bidding prompts bidders to propose and accept registry improvements, higher operating standards, and lower registration fees to win the contract.

--- Indeed, competitive bidding has resulted in lower domain prices and higher operating specifications than what ICANN has achieved through non-competitive negotiations.

--- Experience with the .net TLD and other gTLDs have showed that competitive bidding in the award of gTLD registry agreements, and periodic rebidding, has served as an effective tool for managing the interest of registrants in gTLDs.

--- ICANN’s request for bids should expressly call for bids to specify an internal maximum price that would be charged by the operator for domain registrations, as well as limitations on price increases over time.

--- ICANN’s approach to TLD management demonstrates that it has adopted an ineffective approach with respect to its obligation to promote competition at the registry level.

--- To date, we believe that ICANN has not come close to fulfilling its obligations to employ competitive principles in its management of TLD registry operations.


More information about the Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20 mailing list