Re: [wg-c] There is no "consensus"

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

Craig Simon wrote:

> In my proposal I intentionally did not suggest a mixed model of shared
> not-for-profit registry and simultaneous proprietary-in-perpetuity. I
> agree with Kent, who made as good an argument against the mixed model as
> any.

Where is this argument? I certainly haven't seen it.

> It really is a question of fairness.

You'd better elaborate. Mixed ownership models are the norm in every economy
on the planet except the unfortunate few (North Korea, Cuba) who are stuck
in the past.
There is a public sector and a private sector, as well as commercial
orientations and non-commercial orientations. Each approach has its
strengths and weaknesses, and the best path is to let each model handle
those areas appropriately.

The best comparison between commercial/proprietary and the alternative is
the fate of dot us and dot com. One TLD (.us) was managed by a person of
great intelligence and foresight, and with the public interest in mind. Yet
everyone agrees that dot us is a failure and the whole approach needs to be
revamped. 98 percent of registrations in the States are in NSI's gTLDs. Why?
Because they gave users what they wanted: choose their own names, quick and
cheap automated registrations. The market tends to do that: reward people
who respond to what consumers want, and punish those who don't.

Concerned about the "dark side" of the profit motive? The solution is
simple: create shared gTLDs run by non-profit agencies (or by for-profits
under contract to ICANN). There is absolutely no constraint technically on
the simultaneous pursuit of both models. Consumers would benefit from an
additional choice.There is room for a mixed model and in fact it's the only
solution. If the choice is "shared only" I will fight it to the death and so
will many others, and eventually business will just bypass it. Long term,
ICANN won't survive such a decision.

I have yet to see a single reason why commercial/proprietary models cannot
or should not be combined with shared, non-profit models. All I see are some
purely ideological references to "greed." Look, it's ok for techies living
on government funds to sneer at the marketplace, but don't confuse your
religion with the sort of public policy that ought to be applied to the
whole world.

p.s. Craig:
that alarm that won't go off.....it's not unrelated to the ICANN DNSO
situation.