ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Why no sanctions?


Because we should be encouraging this kind of behavior?

Before calling for sanctions just because it's Verisign, keep a few things
in mind.

- The kind of promotion than Verisign proposed is common in the brick and
mortar world. A manufacturer may keep its wholesale price stable while
offering promotional credits back to individual retailers as a means of
rewarding increased sales. Rest assured that when you saw that great deal
Footlocker was offering on Nikes in the local paper, Nike did not have to
vet the discount it had provided with the Central Shoe Authority. And when
you received free HBO last month from your local cable company, the FCC
didn't have to sign off on that either.

- The overall effect of the promotion may have been to lower prices to
consumers.   

- The fact that Verisign wanted to create an incentive for registrars to
promote .com and .net now that .info and .biz are live is a sign that
competition is beginning -- only beginning -- to take shape. At the first
sign of registry-to-registry price competition though, we've had the
regulator step in and stir the pot.

Forget for a minute that it's Verisign and forget that the contract may (or
may not) have required Verisign to vet with ICANN a plan to award marketing
credits to registrars. Ask the larger question of what kind of environment
we've created when companies doing business servicing domain names have to
seek permission for marketing initiatives.

My initial reaction is to be very dismayed at this report. I'd like to hear
more from ICANN about what in Verisign's original promotion was rejected,
what was allowed, and why. I'd also like to see a more general conversation
within the DNSO about whether ICANN should be regulating business
initiatives at this level of detail.

    -- Bret

 

--
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



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>