<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] FYI: General Counsel 2nd WLS analysis - Another farse...
Alex and all assembly members,
Well as expected ICANN is trying to wiggle around this one.
No surprise there... Just as the UDRP was not broadly supported
but none the less hoist upon the stakeholders/users, by the than
ICANN Interim BOD, so shall WLS it seems.
None the less we [INEGroup] have no problem with WLS
being implemented by Verisign. However it should not be
a defacto standard for any Registrar or Registry.
Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
> General Counsel's Second Analysis of VeriSign Global Registry Services'
> Request for Amendment to Registry Agreement
> (http://www.icann.org/minutes/report-vgrs-wls-22aug02.htm)
>
> Excerpts:
>
> Should the VGRS be permitted to offer some form of WLS?
>
> [...]
> The approach followed in the case of .name [second-level domain e-mail
> service] suggests that the WLS should be allowed, thereby giving
> consumers an additional option, provided there are appropriate
> safeguards in place to prevent the registry operator from abusing
> its sole-source position to the detriment of consumers.
> [...]
>
> If so, what conditions, if any, should be required?
>
> Assuming VGRS is permitted to offer some form of WLS, the question
> arises what conditions (if any) should be required. In its report, the
> DNSO task force suggested several, and some others have been agreed
> by VGRS:
>
> 1. The WLS should only be introduced after the Redemption Grace Period
> is in place. [...]
> 2. No preferential treatment should be given to existing SnapNames
> "SnapBack" reservations. [...]
> 3. Avoidance of registrar preferences through advance knowledge of
> deletion. [...]
> 4. Transparency of reservations [...]
> 5. Pricing [...]
> The price VGRS now proposes to charge for WLS reservations is US$24
> per year (this is reduced from the US$40 it originally proposed), and
> in view of the limited time of the trial, the uncertain volume of
> reservations that will be sold, and need to amortize start-up costs
> over one year, the proposed price appears to be plausibly cost-based
> (accounting for the risk of limited consumer interest). [...]
> 6. Trial period [...]
>
> --
> 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
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
--
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
>>>
|