RE: [ga] Snapnames partner comes out against Verisign's WLS

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

Its my read that the registry constituency is stuck between a rock and a
hard place.

Neulevel and Afilias have both (or are very close to) introducing a
number of new registry services. And you know what? None of them (that
I'm aware of at least) require access to the monopoly database in order
to be pushed out to the market. The problem with the policy debate thus
far is that it hasn't spent any time considering that there are registry
services that don't require a second look and those that do. My
preference is that the DNSO focus exclusively defining a policy that
strictly deals with the introduction of registry services that provide
the registry operator with undue benefit or preference because of their
monopoly control of the relevant TLD database. Those that don't benefit
from the control of the database should be simply included in the
contract by the staff without a second thought.

Hopefully this idea can get some traction before the board votes on the
subject. I fear that the registry constituency has been forced into an
uncomfortable spot because of this lack of granularity in the policy
examination.



                       -rwr




"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright

Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal:
http://www.byte.org/heathrow
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf 
> Of George Kirikos
> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 1:47 PM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Cc: newcase.atr@usdoj.gov
> Subject: [ga] Snapnames partner comes out against Verisign's WLS
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Trouble in paradise? See:
> 
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-transfer/Arc00/msg00370.html

"Yet, I am advocating against the very policy that SnapNames endorses
and from which my company would benefit, simply because it is an unfair
policy. It eliminates competition. Were the task force to accept my
perspective and reject Verisign's proposal, my firm would lose money -
but I am proposing just that. The Verisign proposal is an exercise of
unfair trade practice and unfair restraint of trade."

"It continues to make attempts to establish (or re-establish) its
monopoly in at least some portions of the domain namespace. The current
WLS proposal constitutes nothing more than another such attempt. I
ardently reject  and urge you to reject  any proposal which limits
competition. Such limitations do not serve the consumer."

Kudos to @Com for their courage in supporting competition, and not
following others blindly. I wonder if those in the gTLD registry
constituency are capable of such independent thought and opinion, or are
they all lemmings led by their masters at Verisign?

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.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

--
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