Re: [ga] Re: Last minute changes to Verisign agreements

["Roberto Gaetano" <ga_chair@hotmail.com>]

Dave,

>
>As has been repeatedly explained:
>
>         The EXISTING contract does not prevent Verisign from running
>         BOTH registry and registrar businesses.


As has been repeatedly explained, it is highly questionable whether the sale 
by VeriSign of the registrar business to a subsidiary or other controlled 
party (which was the only way for VeriSign to keep the control on both 
parts) would have stood in court a judgement on antitrust.
As of the letter of the current (previous, at the time of my reply to your 
message) contract, VeriSign would have lost the renewal of its contract if 
the separation was not going to become effective.

Anyway, with the recent vote of the BoD, this is behind us. Now, it is clear 
that the separation is no longer a policy of the house, and therefore the 
point is, unfortunately, moot.

>
>The claim that there is a a policy against it is negated by the fact that
>Verisign has no contractual limitation in this matter.

See above.


>
>So you are rejecting a markedly better contract because of a so-called
>policy that has no relevance to the comparison between alternatives.

IMHO, the question is: better for whom.

I still think that to be able to run (and now without time constraints 
and/or other future limitations) the Registry and the Registrar for the 
major generic TLD *is* giving to VeriSign unfair competitive edge.
As I said, the matter may now be moot, but IMHO we have just witnessed the 
formalization of a change in policy by ICANN.

Regards
Roberto


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.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