[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Deliberations and Recommendations - CW comments

Thu Apr 12 16:14:19 UTC 2018

I think the main issues is that with an endless variety for pricing 
models for especially premium names, it can be sometimes a bit difficult 
to discern the renewal pricing of a particular domain name.

In the previous world, one only had to look at the standard price list 
of a registrar, look for a TLD and find your renewal price. If you do 
that now, you may find a bad surprise down the road when you notice that 
this price does not apply to your premium name, no matter how big the 
letters on the website of the registrar pointing out the possibility of 
differential pricing between names in the same TLD were.

It has become somewhat consumer-unfriendly.

Volker

Am 12.04.2018 um 17:46 schrieb Rob Hall:
>
> Can someone explain to me what the concern is about transparency on 
> price ?
>
> Registries publish their pricing to their clients, the Registrars.
>
> Registrars set whatever price they want for Registrants.
>
> Are we concerned about transparency of a Registrar not knowing what 
> price a Registry is charging them ?
>
> Or are we concerned that a Registrant can’t tell what price their 
> Registrar is charging them ?
>
> Rob
>
> *From: *Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf 
> of Vanda Scartezini <vanda at scartezini.org>
> *Date: *Thursday, April 12, 2018 at 11:41 AM
> *To: *Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com>, Maxim 
> Alzoba <m.alzoba at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *"gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Deliberations and Recommendations - 
> CW comments
>
> Any regulation on price will lead to Cartel organizations and 
> corruption associated to it. Agree that transparency is the only 
> demand we shall make related to pricing and from my view majority of 
> it is in the contract words.
>
> Best to all
>
> */Vanda Scartezini/*
>
> */Polo Consultores Associados/*
>
> */Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004/*
>
> */01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil/*
>
> */Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253/*
>
> */Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 /*
>
> */Sorry for any typos. /*
>
> *From: *Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf 
> of Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, April 12, 2018 at 06:35
> *To: *Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *"gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Deliberations and Recommendations - 
> CW comments
>
> Wasn’t pricing and why attempting to regulate it already discussed to 
> death in the last round?
>
> I have some recollection of this.
>
> I think the key thing with regard to pricing is transparency, which is 
> already baked into the contracts.
>
> Regards
>
> Michele
>
> --
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> https://www.blacknight.com/
>
> http://blacknight.blog/
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>
> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
>
> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business 
> Park,Sleaty
>
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
>
> *From: *Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf 
> of Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Thursday 12 April 2018 at 09:13
> *To: *"lists at christopherwilkinson.eu Wilkinson" 
> <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
> *Cc: *"gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>, 
> Christopher Wilkinson <cw at christopherwilkinson.eu>
> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Deliberations and Recommendations - 
> CW comments
>
> Dear Christopher,
>
> I'd like to make a comment and a note.
>
> 1.  a note about pricing for premium domains - 'picket fence' protects 
> both registries and registrars from influence of policies on pricing
>
> (also direct price regulation from ICANN will lead to investigations 
> of anti-monopoly agencies around the world[in some countries it will 
> constitute a crime])
>
> 2. a comment on "Registry would be taking advantage of its monopoly 
> over their TLD in question in an unjustifiably discriminatory manner."
>
> Fact that a particular company has a monopoly can be established only 
> by the relevant market regulator.
>
> Registrants are free to choose another TLDs, if they are not happy 
> with the terms of the particular ones.
>
> So assumptions that Registries are monopolists are not established 
> facts and we can not use it.
>
> Sincerely Yours,
>
> Maxim Alzoba
> Special projects manager,
> International Relations Department,
> FAITID
>
> m. +7 916 6761580(+whatsapp)
>
> skype oldfrogger
>
> Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow)
>
>
>
>
>
>     On 11 Apr 2018, at 23:51,
>     lists at christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>Wilkinson
>     <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>>
>     wrote:
>
>     Good evening:
>
>
>
>
>         Allow me to amplify and confirm my few Chat comments during
>         the conference call last Monday afternoon, 9 April 2018.
>
>         In general the working document (1.12 Deliberations etc .) is
>         an excursion into a working method with which I am quite
>         unfamiliar, so I ask those of you who have this for your
>         bread-and-butter to bear with me for a little while. I also
>         have noted that the document is in the form of questions for
>         discussion and not recommendations at this stage. So I hope
>         that some of my comments may still be taken into account.
>
>         Indeed, at some points, I find the drafting on some issues
>         rather uncertain; there are ambiguities and options that  -
>         from the point of view of a rather more conventional  approach
>         – might be described as loopholes. ICANN and GNSO will no
>         doubt have gathered that the next 'round' will be scrutinised
>         by third parties far more thoroughly than was the case in 2004
>         or 2012. More specifically:
>
>         1.Rollout: It would be helpful to have information about how
>         many new TLDs have still not been implemented, and why.
>
>         For instance, after the 24 months allowed, it is not clear why
>         “… extensions…should continue to be available according to the
>         same terms and conditions as they were allowed during the 2012
>         round.”
>
>         In a related question, “The Work Track was also careful to
>         avoid drawing the conclusion that only having <nic.TLD>
>         registered constituted 'squatting' or 'warehousing' “
>
>         Taken together these two statements leave the strong
>         impression that the Work Track would in practice accept
>         squatting and warehousing of new TLDs. Was that intended?
>
>         If there has been 'unwanted behaviour' – and the subsequent
>         discussion suggests that there has been – then one might have
>         expected a rather more proactive approach to discouraging such
>         in the future.
>
>         2. Contractual compliance  - pricing for premium domains.
>
>         The document discusses the issue of 'pricing for premium
>         domains' but reports that 'The WT  has not reached any
>         conclusions on this issue'.  Whereas it is quite likely that
>         applicant representations and related authorisations would
>         address prmium pricing.
>
>         For instance, in the case of a geographical name, there would
>         normally be a presumption of non-discrimination between
>         Registrants, such as towns or other communities, within that
>         geo-TLD.
>
>         More generally, ICANN might consider moving towards a policy
>         whereby the economic 'rent' for a 'premium name' should accrue
>         to the Registrant and not to the Registry. Otherwise it would
>         appear that the Registry would be taking advantage of its
>         monopoly over their TLD in question in an unjustifiably
>         discriminatory manner.
>
>         3. Contractual compliance – enforceability of representations
>
>         The document reports that the WT considered a proposal 'that
>         all applicant representations should be included in the
>         registry agreement' and that 'There was no agreement … in
>         support of this proposal.'
>
>         This would appear to be a rather weak conclusion which might
>         be queried at a later stage because it does not really respond
>         to the four questions indicated under f. Deliberations.
>
>
>         *
>
>         *
>
>         *
>
>         The above is but a summary of the main concerns evoked by this
>         section of the draft. I look forward to discussing these and
>         other aspects in due course.
>
>         Christopher Wilkinson
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
>     Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

-- 
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -

Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net

Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com

Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems

Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu

Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.

--------------------------------------------

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Best regards,

Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -

Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net

Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com

Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems
www.twitter.com/key_systems

CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534

Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu

This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20180412/ce926cd5/attachment-0001.html>