<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY><!-- Converted from text/plain format --><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3></FONT>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Hi all,</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>I just went through the "Initial Report on new
gTLDs" at -</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2><A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/newgtlds-issues-report-01-28jul06.htm">http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/newgtlds-issues-report-01-28jul06.htm</A></FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>There is a single glaring issue in the "Term of
Reference 2. Selection Criteria for New Top Level Domains" as it is currently
stated. One of the recommendations within this terms of references states
-<BR><BR><I>"Applicants (for new gTLDs) must offer a clearly differentiated
domain name space with respect to defining the purpose of the
application"</I><BR><BR>Please find implications of the above statement as below
-</FONT></P>
<UL>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>One of ICANNs mandate is to foster and create
competition in such a manner so as to benefit consumers<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Competition, along with "stability" and
"security" has been of of the founding principles of ICANN. This has been
mentioned repeatedly in the Green paper, White paper, ICANN MoU and the ICANN
by-laws. Few excerpts of the same have been attached below for
reference<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>A portion of this mandate has been achieved by
creating Domain Registrars who compete amongst themselves globally and offer
Domain Registration services to a worldwide audience. This accreditation
process of Registrars has resulted in the price of a domain name reducing from
$35 to $7<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>This has resulted in significant benefit to
consumers in terms of price and availability. Various different business
models have emerged due to this competition which have increased domain name
proliferation, availability and service levels<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>However, this aspect has only created a choice
from a distribution perspective for customers ie Customers have the choice to
now buy the SAME Domain Name from multiple different
Registrars<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>This however has not given the Customer a choice
of the TLD string itself<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>The white paper states "The U.S. Government is
of the view, however, that competitive systems generally result in greater
innovation, consumer choice, and satisfaction in the long run. Moreover, the
pressure of competition is likely to be the most effective means of
discouraging registries from acting monopolistically." and "The Internet
succeeds in great measure because it is a decentralized system that encourages
innovation and maximizes individual freedom. Where possible, market mechanisms
that support competition and consumer choice should drive the management of
the Internet because they will lower costs, promote innovation, encourage
diversity, and enhance user choice and satisfaction."<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>It is true that competition has resulted in
choice for consumers and lowered costs for consumers. For instance, <EM>as an
example</EM> since the last 2 years .INFO Domain names have been sold at very
low prices since the Registry is offering them at $0.49 to $0.99. This has
resulted in a LARGE number of potential customers worldwide opting for .INFO
domain names instead of .com domain names. We are a large ICANN Accredited
Domain Registrar, and we have seen .INFO domain names registered by our
Customers in the last few months is equal to the number of .COM domain names
registered by our Customers.<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>The fact that .INFO offers a similar proposition
to some consumers has also resulted in the .INFO space growing rapidly to 3
million domain names, and the .BIZ space growing to 1.5
million.<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>.INFO and .BIZ are gTLDs which DO NOT offer a
"clearly differentiated domain space" as compared to existing incumbents.
Infact most Registrars market them as a TLD equivalent of .com, .net, .org
etc. This blur allows a Customer the ability to register domain names at a
cheaper cost, or register a particular string that is not available in the
.COM space<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>This also results in competition for the
Registry operator of .COM. While we are still aware that nothing can
<EM>truly</EM> compete with .COM, atleast the existence of other overlapping
gTLD options such as ,BIZ, .INFO etc provide some basic level of choice to a
Customer and thus create a certain level of competition for incumbent
Registries<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Other TLDs such as .travel, .aero, .jobs do not
directly compete with .com and hence cannot bring in competition amongst
registries.<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>The only way to allow competition in the gTLD
space is to allow other gTLDs which <EM>do not have a restrictive or
differentiated space</EM><BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>This is even more imperative now than before.
Earlier gTLD contracts did not stipulate "almost-perpetual" renewal and did
not create circumstances which allowed a Registry operator to arbitrarily
modify prices. The recent trend has however demonstrated that gTLD Registry
contracts may have more latitude in creating a monopolistic position. It seems
like gTLD contracts may not be rebid and may have the discretionary ability to
change prices. This position allows Registries to increase prices without cost
justifications and will have a detrimental effect on consumers and registrants
and Registrars<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>The past history demonstrates that competition
within gTLD Registries can only be created in two ways -<BR> </FONT>
<OL>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>By rebid of a Registry (and hence not have a
perpetual contract). This was clearly observed in case of .NET where the
open bid reduced the pricing for Domain Registrations in the TLD thus
benefiting consumers. It is another matter that due to skillful negotiations
this benefit turned out to be short lived<BR></FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>In the absence of open bidding for Registries
the only other way to create a basic level of competition is to allow other
TLD string options and choices to consumers. This cannot be achieved if each
TLD space created is non-overlapping and clearly demarcated separately. In
that case each TLD will become a monopoly and there will be no competition
amongst TLD Registries<BR> </FONT></LI></OL></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>The recommendations by the GNSO already cover
technical competence as a criterion for selecting a new TLD Registry.
Therefore any Registry applicant must pass certain technical criteria to
ensure that they would not pose a threat to the stability and
security<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>However other than that there should be no
reason to discourage someone from applying a generic string which may overlap
with existing TLD Registries such as
com/net/org/biz/info<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Such a stipulation would be similar to a
stipulation that may say that a Registrar can ONLY sell domain names within a
specific Country. Imagine if that stipulation were to be created when the
Registrar accreditation process was opened up. That would not create
competition and benefit the customers<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Similarly restricting the reach and audience of
a TLD Registry will not create competition amongst TLD
Registries<BR> </FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Verdana size=2>I think that the notion of strong support for
this criteria may be a misnomer inasmuch as for someone like me, this criteria
in the GNSO terms of reference has slipped by unnoticed amongst the bigger
things. I may be incorrect, but I would like to take this opportunity to
ensure that the above implications and ramifications of this particular term
of reference are considered by the GNSO before any final reccommendations are
made in this regards.</FONT></LI></UL>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>I would strongly recommend that Registrars voice
out their comments about this by sending an email to <A
href="mailto:newgtlds-comments@icann.org">newgtlds-comments@icann.org</A> and
filling the web form at <A
href="http://survey.icann.org/cgi/comments">http://survey.icann.org/cgi/comments</A></FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>I would also recommend that we should come up with
a Constituency statement concerning this particular Term of Reference. In its
current position it may eliminate any and all possibility of competition in the
gTLD space.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Thanks<BR>Best Regards<BR>Bhavin
Turakhia<BR>CEO<BR>Directi<BR><BR>--------------------------------------------------------------<BR><BR><B>SOME
Excerpts from the White paper, MOU and by-laws of ICANN</B><BR><BR><I><U>From
the ICANN White Paper</U></I><BR><BR><I><BR>"Principles for a New System. The
Green Paper set out four principles to guide the evolution of the domain name
system: stability, <U>competition</U>, private bottom-up coordination, and
representation."</I><BR><BR><I><BR>"Further, in response to the comments
received, the U.S. government believes that new corporation should<U> establish
and implement appropriate criteria for gTLD
registries</U>."</I><BR><BR><BR><I><U>ICANN MOU</U></I><BR><BR><I>"On July 1,
1997, as part of the Administration's Framework for Global Electronic Commerce,
the President directed the Secretary of Commerce to privatize the management of
the domain name system (DNS) in a manner that <U>increases competition</U> and
facilitates international participation in its
management."</I><BR><BR><BR><I>"This Agreement promotes the management of the
DNS in a manner that will permit market mechanisms to <U>support competition and
consumer choice</U> in the technical management of the DNS. This <U>competition
will lower costs, promote innovation, and enhance user choice</U> and
satisfaction."<BR></I><BR><BR><I>"Collaborate on the design, development and
testing of a plan for creating a process that will consider the possible
expansion of the number of gTLDs. The designed process should consider and take
into account the following:<BR><BR>a. The potential impact of new gTLDs on the
Internet root server system and Internet stability.<BR><BR>b. The creation and
implementation of minimum criteria for new and existing gTLD
registries.<BR><BR>c. <U>Potential consumer benefits/costs associated with
establishing a competitive environment for gTLD
registries</U>"</I><BR> </FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Verdana size=2><I><U>ICANN By-laws</U></I><BR><BR><I>"Introducing
and <U>promoting competition</U> in the registration of domain names where
practicable and beneficial in the public
interest."</I></FONT></P></FONT></BODY></HTML>