[ga] SNAPNAMES: A firm grasp on Unreality

[Loren Stocker <loren@800.net>]

Hi All,

Here's our take on the Snapnames Presentation.

Loren
www.evil.biz!

A firm grasp on Unreality

The primary +IBw-benefits+IB0 of WLS purported in Wednesday+IBk-s conference call,
May 22, 2002, by Snapnames are pure non-sense including:

End Users Want This: If there are +IBw-haves+IB0 and +IBw-have nots,+IB0 it is not
the current Registrants +IBM the +IBw-haves+IB0 -- that want this service. To them
it is a +IBw-protection+IB0 shakedown.

End Users Can+IBk-t Afford to Compete for Expired Domains: Actually, Snap Name,
Namewinner, and others has made it possible for End Users to compete +IBM in
this case the +IBw-have nots+IB0gFA with the professionals.

Soon we will have 100 Different Services: Not so. In fact there has already
been consolidation. Just last year there were hundreds of combatants competing
for deleted domains; now there are only a few. It takes an economy of scale
that makes it more convenient for Registrars to resell services like Snapnames
than to replicate systems at this level

End Users Will Have to Sign Up Everywhere: True, but this presupposes that
there is but one End User who wants a domain with 100% certainty. What about
other interested parties? Do they not have a right to compete for this too? 

End Users Seeking a Registered Domain Will Now have WLS: This is absurd. In
reality any valuable WLS option will be sold in the +IBw-Land Rush+IB0 long
before this mythical End User asks. Those who have hope today become hopeless
under WLS, because it +IBw-forecloses+IB0 their right to compete +IBM only one is
sold and the holder has renewal rights.

WLS is Less Confusing: Free markets require choice and, inherently, expert
advice is necessary. It is a myth that you can just +IBw-call the phone
company,+IB0 for example, to get a good toll-free number. After 30 years of
toll-free service it is still +IBM and will always seem +IBM +IBw-confusing+IB0 for
the End User. WLS would be devastating simply to the one successful End User;
yet simply devastating to other End Users who are excluded.

Squatters +IBw-will not be a problem:+IB0 This is non-sense. All that the $35 WLS
will do is raise the threshold below which speculators will compete to
old-fashion way. In addition, +IBw-squatters+IB0 and +IBw-speculators+IB0 are not
one and the same; yet seem to be confused here. All markets are full of
speculators who, in the domain market, have every legal right to compete. The
implication of the term squatter is that someone is infringing on the rights
of others. 

UDRP will protect trademark holders: Unless they+IBk-ve changed their position,
VSRG has explicated stated that the UDRP will not apply to WLS options. In
addition, it will be difficult to file a legal action against an unauthorized
WLS subscriber, as there are no actual damages! This carries the legal
distinction of a threat vs. a punch.

WLS should be dead upon arrival but it just won+IBk-t go away. Most was most
telling when George Kirikos asked, +IBw-What would it take for Verisign to
withdraw this proposal.+IB0 Chuck Gomez of Verisign had no answer. Not
surprising. This is like asking a drunk what it takes to quit drinking.
Verisign wants CASH FLOW -- nothing else seems to really matter.

We have full details posted at www.evil.biz




--
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