RE: [registrars] Constituency versus Trade Association

["Elliot Noss" <enoss@tucows.com>]

Mike:

It would be helpful here if you could expand on your view of the difference
between the constituency and a trade association, perhaps with specific
references to actions that one group would take that the other wouldn't.
Even more helpful would be wrapping some conext around this such as painting
these actions in the context of, say, new gTLDs or whois/privacy.

I confess I don't have a view on what you say below, but primarily because I
could not distinguish in my head between the two sufficiently. Especially
given that one group is formally inside the process and the other is not.

Also, it may be helpful if you could make those comments in light of the
fact that a number of companies are accredited registrars but do not
actively register domain names.

Thanks in advance.

Regards

Elliot Noss
Tucows inc.
416-538-5494

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 11:05 AM
> To: registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: [registrars] Constituency versus Trade Association
>
>
> Hello All:
>
> I am writing a more comprehensive email on this subject but
> thought I would
> throw 2 of my cents in now.
>
> When the Constituency was formed back in Berlin it was purposely
> designed to
> be light weight to prevent some of the bureaucracy that has managed to
> dominate the list lately. As the industry has developed there are pressing
> needs for its members to organize and advocate common positions. However,
> this should be done primarily through a trade association and not
> through an
> ICANN constituency.
>
> The solution I believe is rather simple, the constituency no longer is
> required to pay ICANN to participate in the GSNO. ICANN accredited
> registrars currently pay ICANN a US$4,000 for the first TLD, and
> US$500 for
> each additional TLD yearly accreditation fee. Assuming you are a small to
> mid-sized registrar that is $6,000 per year in ICANN accreditation fees to
> provide registration services in the .com. .org, .net, .info and
> .biz TLDs.
> This is in ADDITION to the per domain name assessment charged to registrar
> per domain name under management. This year that fee is approximately 12
> cents per domain name per year although it is expect to increase
> to 18 cents
> per domain name year.
>
> In summary that is a lot of money that EVERY ICANN accredited registrar is
> paying, and does not include those fees that registrars must incur if they
> want to attend any of the ICANN regional meeting. It is my humble opinion
> that registrars should not have to pay to participate in an organization
> which they are already funding.
>
> Now I know that some registrars will argue that $750 is not a lot
> of money,
> and that if people can not afford it they should not be in the business.
> However, I respectfully disagree with this statement.
>
> My approach which was rejected in the drafting committee, is that every
> ICANN accredited registrar should be allowed to participate
> within the ICANN
> registrar constituency free of charge. By allowing every ICANN accredited
> registrar to vote this would help legitimate positions that we take. If
> larger registrars, a couple of small to mid-size registrars, want
> to retain
> staff let them under the auspices of a trade association.
>
> I am disheartened that the focus of by-law revisions over the
> past couple of
> months have focused on exclusion, not inclusion.
>
> More detailed email shall be coming shortly.
>
> Mike
>
> P.S. Regarding funding a minimal level of administration for the
> constituency, i.e. votebot etc. There is currently upwards of
> $30,000 in the
> bank account. We have never expended more than $10,000 a year on
> non-GNSO/DNSO expenses. Simply put there is sufficient reserves
> to carry the
> constituency for several years in the proposed lightweight structure.
>
> P.P.S. For those registrars that feel strongly they should not have to pay
> ICANN any more money to participate in a process they already spend
> thousands of dollars a year already on please contact me. If the business
> constituency can potentially have two constituencies (large and small) why
> can't the registrars have two (those wanting to pay and operate as a trade
> association) and those that just want a voice on specific issues
> without the
> threat of having their voice silenced by not paying a self-imposed
> constituency poll tax.
>
>
>