Re: [ga] FYI: General Counsel 2nd WLS analysis

[Don Brown <donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net>]

I read the "entire" text of the message.  It is designed to "justify
it" regardless of the downside or the community's (bottoms up)
consensus opposing it.  It appears to be flagrant collusion - bid
rigging.  It is disgustingly lop sided.  I hope Lynn has a high limit
on his Legal Mal coverage, since this could be where he bites that
bullet and needs it.



Thursday, August 22, 2002, 3:53:21 PM, George Kirikos <gkirikos@yahoo.com> wrote:
GK> Hello,

GK> Comparing WLS to something like the .name optional e-mail system is a
GK> joke. By its very nature, WLS trumps competition. When the General
GK> Counsel of ICANN is engaging in this kind of "stretch" to justify WLS,
GK> things don't look good. Time to get the lawyers ready, methinks....

GK> Sincerely,

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


GK> --- Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de> 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 [...]
>> 


GK> __________________________________________________
GK> Do You Yahoo!?
GK> HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
GK> http://www.hotjobs.com



----
Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net         http://www.inetconcepts.net
PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
----

--
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