<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] Re: Board descisions
- To: "Roberto Gaetano" <ga_chair@hotmail.com>, dhc2@dcrocker.net, patrick@stealthgeeks.net
- Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Board descisions
- From: Jonathan Weinberg <weinberg@mail.msen.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 21:27:01 -0500
- Cc: svl@nrw.net, apisan@servidor.unam.mx, Amadeu@nominalia.com, karl@CaveBear.com, jcohen@shapirocohen.com, phil.davidson@bt.com, f.fitzsimmons@att.net, ken.fockler@sympatico.ca, mkatoh@wdc.fujitsu.com, hans@icann.org, shkyong@kgsm.kaist.ac.kr, andy@ccc.de, junsec@wide.ad.jp, quaynor@ghana.com, roberts@icann.org, helmut.schink@icn.siemens.de, linda@icann.org, vcerf@mci.net, ga@dnso.org, ecdiscuss@ec-pop.org, core@corenic.org
- In-Reply-To: <F59KKECBlGkVf370Skb0000671f@hotmail.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
At 03:00 AM 3/12/2001 +0100, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>Personally, I prefer the old contract.
>I believe that the separation between Registrar and Registry (or, rather,
>to keep the principle of the separation) will be more beneficial than the
>reassignment of .org.
>The reassignment of .org is just a matter of "quantity", i.e. it reduces
>(of a quantity of which the significancy is doubtful) the overall market
>share of Verisign, while the current contract aims at changing the quality
>of the presence, i.e. prevent contemporary presence at the Registry and
>Registrar level for the same TLD.
>This was, BTW, one of the basic principles of the contract, and to abandon
>this is a major change that has to be discussed.
>[snip]
I believe that the proposed revisions cannot be approved by April
1 if there is to be anything left of the notion that ICANN is a bottom-up
organization. But if I were to speak to the merits, I would agree with
Roberto. One of the reasons that the proposals have so conspicuously
failed to win community support is that the arguments made in their favor
are so implausible. Maintaining the .com and .net registries together with
the dominant registrar has plain anticompetitive potential; the fact that
there are now independent registrars with their own market share is not
itself a reason to abandon a procompetitive divestiture. ICANN staff have
urged that the benefit to this transaction lies in making the Verisign
registry contract look like the proposed new TLD registry contracts, but
they have not explained why (other than on esthetic grounds) we should view
that congruence as overridingly important. Nor does the procompetitive
benefit, if any, of causing Verisign to spin off .org begin to outweigh the
disadvantages the contract would bring.
Jon
Jonathan Weinberg
co-chair, Working Group C
Professor of Law, Wayne State University
weinberg@msen.com
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|