[Gnso-newgtld-wg] What behaviors would we consider undesirable?

Mon Jan 20 23:09:17 UTC 2020

Hi,

Again doc  <https://docs.google.com/document/d/16qDoiK6vydQp6a0v9tMvU2l5fcypJY24hCzTIVTjKwk/edit?usp=sharing> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16qDoiK6vydQp6a0v9tMvU2l5fcypJY24hCzTIVTjKwk/edit?usp=sharing

In number 9 it states:

“Encourage new entrants into the field.”

Could we define what constitutes a “new entrant”? If we are discussing “entrants”:

*        Is that the legal entity that submits the application? Or the management team behind it?
If so: In the coming round almost EVERY SINGLE application will be submitted by a unique legal entity (to be better positioned to trade the asset) – and all these entities will be “new”.  A newly minted U.S. or offshore company costs virtually nothing.
So does a newly minted legal entity constitute a “new entrant”? That would describe most if not all applicants.

*        Is it the team behind the application? Does that team have to be “new”?
Most “new” applicants will be guided by some sort of consultant who is experienced.

Plus: If “new entrants” receive any benefits in any way form or shape: then it’s always simple to “hide” the true owners – and to hide the true management crew.

So I wonder what the criteria for “new entrant” would be, how gaming can be circumvented and how and who would vet the applicant owners and their “external management” team.

In Alternative 1 (Vickrey Auction):

“Bids are submitted along with the applications, so they would not have any information about the contention set…”

How does Alternative 1 prevent private contention set resolutions? Applicants can agree on pay-outs and retract their applications so that there is only one left. See also “reveal day” and “public comment” in “additional considerations”: the applicant identities will be public after reveal day, right?

Thanks,

Alexander

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
Sent: Montag, 20. Januar 2020 15:44
To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] What behaviors would we consider undesirable?

Good evening:

I strongly 'suggest' that we do not want to replace the word 'Collusion' in this context.

1. Collusion took place in the last round, otherwise there could not have been any private auctions.

2. The fact that we are discussing this at all strongly suggests - to the outside world - that we would prefer to dissimulate that fact.

3. ICANN is the regulator of the conditions of competition in this sector; if we cannot deal with this matter, it severely undermines the original rationale for having ICANN at all.

Regards

CW

On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:30, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com <mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com> > wrote:

I put some suggested language in the Google doc to replace the word “Collusion”:

 <https://docs.google.com/document/d/16qDoiK6vydQp6a0v9tMvU2l5fcypJY24hCzTIVTjKwk/edit?usp=sharing> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16qDoiK6vydQp6a0v9tMvU2l5fcypJY24hCzTIVTjKwk/edit?usp=sharing

Anne

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2020 2:58 AM
To: Dorrain, Kristine < <mailto:dorraink at amazon.com> dorraink at amazon.com>
Cc:  <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] What behaviors would we consider undesirable?

Kristine,

This is a not a reasonable business adjustment. If the contention set seems "unbeatable", one could withdraw or simply wait the appropriate refund. A similar way to see #2 is a participant in a race that starts extorting other racers when it realises it won't win the race. 

It doesn't matter that the original intent had good faith; if someone switches to a bad behaviour on the fly, then it's now up for a new assessment of its attitude. 

Rubens

On 16 Jan 2020, at 20:57, Dorrain, Kristine < <mailto:dorraink at amazon.com> dorraink at amazon.com> wrote:

Hi Rubens, with respect to #2, you admit good faith intent at the time of application.  At what point would an applicant’s reasonable business adjustment reacting to the unforeseen business impact of third party applications and business decisions switch the first applicant’s good faith to bad faith?  It seems like the community would get to use the benefit of hindsight to judge the reactionary business decisions made by other applications in their business strategy. 

Kristine

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg < <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 1:14 PM
To:  <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] What behaviors would we consider undesirable?

<Leadership Hat Off>

I will start with two different although similar bad behaviours:

- Apply with no intention to actually run the TLDs, just to get into private auctions and profit from losing them. 

- Apply with intent to run the TLDs, but after contention sets are revealed, change strategy to profit from losing some TLDs instead of fighting to get them. 

Rubens

On 16 Jan 2020, at 17:17, Jeff Neuman < <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com> jeff.neuman at comlaude.com> wrote:

All,

On the call early this morning (for some of us), while we were discussing the goals/objectives to consider when selecting a mechanism of last resort to resolve string contention, a very important question was asked by a participant on the call.  The question demonstrated that what one person believes is “Bad Faith” other people may not believe is “bad faith” with respect to mechanisms to resolve contention sets.

So, with the e-mail chain, I would like for members of the Working Group to discuss what behaviors they would consider to be of the type that we would like to preclude?  And by the same token, what are the types of activities that we know we would like to allow.

For example, we believe from most of the comments that have come in as well as in our discussions, that some forms of private resolution have been deemed acceptable.  This includes the creation of joint ventures between applicants (assuming public comment, etc.), potentially revising applications to address concerns (eg., trademark owner agrees to withdraw its application if other applicant agrees to mitigate trademark abuse), 2 trademark owners agree to modify strings to enable both to have their own TLDs (eg., .deltafaucets or .deltaair)), etc.

We have also heard from the ICANN Board that they may believe that participating in private auctions with the sole purpose of losing and using those to fund other auctions may not be as desirable. 

Though the next call with not be on this topic, we did want to put this issue out on e-mail.  Please discuss.

Thanks.

Jeff Neuman

Senior Vice President 

Com Laude | Valideus
1751 Pinnacle Drive

Suite 600, McLean

VA 22102, USA

M: +1.202.549.5079

D: +1.703.635.7514

E:  <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com> jeff.neuman at comlaude.com
 <http://www.comlaude.com/> www.comlaude.com

<image003.jpg>

  _____  

The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see  <https://comlaude.com/> www.comlaude.com _______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
 <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy> https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos> https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

  _____  

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. 
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
 <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy> https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos> https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200120/0f3050f9/attachment-0001.html>