Re: [ga] WLS Questions

["James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>]

What would fix the WLS issue would be to have a period after a domain
expired, where anyone who wanted it could express intereset, and there would
be a fair lottery to see who got it.     And, at any point before the
lottery, the old domain holder should be able to get it back.

Jamie


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Berryhill" <john@johnberryhill.com>
To: <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 12:13 AM
Subject: [ga] WLS Questions


:
: I'm trying to understand this notion of how a monopoly WLS, which
guarantees
: only one person a crack at an expiring name, is "fair" relative to
multiple
: competing services, and would appreciate hearing from someone who (a)
: believes it is fair, and (b) is not associated with SnapNames or Verisign.
:
: Chuck Gomes has said that something like 50% of SnapNames customers are
: speculators instead of "average" domain name registrants.  Leaving aside
the
: question of how a population of 50% of anything is not "average", or the
: methodology used to read the minds of the other 50% to determine their
: motivation, then can someone clue me in to how 50% of WLS position holders
: are NOT going to be speculators?
:
: Snapbacks are $69 a pop, and we are told half of them are owned by
: speculators.  So, the point here is that SnapNames wants to have 50% fewer
: customers?  Or they want to charge 100% of them twice as much money in
order
: to get rid of the "bad" customers while keeping the "good" customers?
:
: And with the "price high enough to discourage speculation" idea, what is
the
: evidence that speculators don't have more money than these "average"
: registrants for whom we are trying to make things "fair"?
:
: And if we aren't going to have a dispute resolution procedure for people
who
: take up WLS slots on expiring domain names that are someone else's
: trademarks, then what is the point of making the identity of WLS slot
: holders known?
:
: I have to take my hat off to the guy with enough chutzpah to tell a Senate
: subcommittee that ICANN was strangling consumer choice and competition by
: refusing to introduce a monopoly service that would replace several
: competing services to do the same thing.  Doing that and avoiding
dizziness
: at the same time is an admirable feat.
:
: --
: 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
:
:
:


--
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