RE: Re[2]: [ga] Draft Resolution

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: William X. Walsh [mailto:william@userfriendly.com]
|> Sent: Sunday, 18 March 2001 12:40 PM
|> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Draft Resolution
|>
|> I don't agree.  Non-competitive systems tend to lead to higher prices
|> and costs, and less efficiency.

Hi WX

That would depend on the structure used.  A number of the ccTLD's Registries
operate as non-commercial entities.  I see no evidence this has led to
inefficiencies or higher costs.  There is variation with the Registries as to
the costs.  I would like to see a cap put on the Registry fees.  By having a set
fee, the costs can not increase.

|> The domain industry is just that, an industry.  It needs to be guided
|> by the same types of influences other businesses do, and that includes
|> competitive forces.

I see the Registries as being a major part of the infrastructure, not as part of
the commercial interests.  At the Registrar level, competition and commercial
factors should be encouraged, this is the level it belongs, where the consumers
are.  If we follow your reasoning, ICANN should itself be a commercial entity.

|> With out the competitive factor, there is no driving force for
|> innovation and development that lead to lower costs and thus lower
|> prices, and other factors.

I've seen this argument raised a number of times but I still fail to see it in
practical examples.  Innovation and development can be driven without direct
commercial competition at the Registry level.  Competition and commercialisation
at the Registrar level will be as effective in driving innovation and
development.  Some forced funding from the Registry level would also be
effective in this regard.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html