<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Re: Antitrust Violations
First set of comments in reply to Ray's question, with the following set in
response to John Berryhill:
regarding the comment that "Therefore it is vital that registrars be
perceived as holding the power to pay the bills." -- I take this to be a
reference to the fact that the only "power" the registrars enjoy is the power
of being perceived to be paying for 55% of ICANN's total budget.
In reality, the registrars are aware that ICANN planned to shift payment
responsibility away from the registrars and into the sole hands of the
registries from whom collection would be far easier.
Consider these excerpts from the Minutes of the May 4, 2001 Registrar
Teleconference:
"Concern over fee structure. Attempting to remove registrars from ICANN
billing, because certain registrars are not paying. What registrars are not
paying? Under the proposed agreement the registry will be liable to ICANN
for registrar fee component. Therefore, registry will bear enforcement
obligations. Arguably registries
could collect this new fee component upfront instead of in the rears."
http://www.icann-registrars.org/pdfs/Minutes-teleconference-4-may-2001.PDF
Further comment on this topic was provided in the Stockholm Registrar minutes:
"Rob Hall then provided an update of the ICANN budget committee. He noted
that the registrar representatives succeeding in maintaining the status quo
regarding payment terms. There was a push by ICANN to shift payment
obligations from the registrars to the registry. There was grave concern
among registrars that this would dilute our voice in the process."
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/doc00034.doc
Registrars like to think that its "their money" that is making these
payments, even while we all know that it comes directly from the registrant
registration fees. They are scared by the prospect that they will lose power
if all payments are instead collected by the registries. In such a case they
could no longer claim any special treatment based upon the fact that they
allegedly provide ICANN with the bulk of its funding.
---------------------
John, you should well know that fixing prices is only one element in
antitrust cases. I refer you to
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/guidelines/redir5.htm for other relevant
considerations. Contrary to your assumption, Mr. Palage was driving at
something other than the disconnect to which you have referred -- he was
specifically commenting on the ERC proposal to grant contracting parties
voting rights equivalent to the collective remainder of the GNSO
constituencies. This would allow registries and registrars effective veto
power over the proposals put forth by the rest of the community (as the other
constituencies could never attain the requisite two-thirds vote needed for a
consensus policy if such a proposal was thwarted by this particular
self-interested bloc).
--
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
>>>
|