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

[john.c.lewis@bt.com]

A couple of observations on the nub of this corner of the debate:

1) Any generic TLD which is reserved to a single registrar/registry is a de
facto monopoly and will not satisfy competition law in some parts of the
world. Exclusive commercial registries may be an option but perhaps not an
advisable one, so lets not pretend they are.
2) Patent offices are not a good model for this analysis; a single (=
generic)  technological or scientific idea has to be registered in many
territorial domains to achieve global rights. 

Regards

John C Lewis
Manager - International Organisations Europe
BT delegate ETNO Executive Board
BT delegate EURODATA Foundation Board
Tel: +44 (0) 1442 295258 Mob: +44 (0) 802 218271
Fax: +44 (0) 1442 295861

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Milton Mueller [SMTP:mueller@syr.edu]
> Sent:	20 July 1999 16:48
> To:	Javier SOLA
> Cc:	wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject:	Re: [wg-c] There is no "consensus"
> 
> 
> 
> Javier SOLA wrote:
> 
> > At 17:01 19/07/99 -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
> >
> > >Under the proprietary model, if I register "milton.web" the registry
> will
> > >most likely be the same corporation as the registrar.
> >
> > I don't think so. The non-shared registry is history. Having ICANN force
> > NSi to open its registry sets a precedent that cannot be changed now.
> 
> Javier, we have to keep an open mind about the options before us. The
> White Paper
> specifically singled out NSI's gTLDs for special treatment because of its
> dominance of the market (com is 62% of all registrations worldwide, 75%
> with net
> and org) and the mistake USG made in letting NSI have a monopoly for so
> long. The
> White paper explicitly reserves the issue of competing commercial
> registries to
> the new organization. Exclusive commercial registries is a live policy
> option.
> There are several on this list who support it. Please do not try to
> pretend
> otherwise.
> 
> > Quite an statement. ALL patent registry offices work this way. There is
> a
> > central (usually government department) registry that is non profit, and
> > ALL registrar agents (TM agents) are for-profit companies that compete
> on
> > price and service. This is the one model that works in the real world.
> 
> This is a highly inappropriate model. A patent registration is a grant of
> a
> *territorial* property right by a national government. As such, it follows
> the
> monopolistic nature of government itself.
> 
> A domain name is a globally visible address that performs a technical
> function.
> The Swedish patent office does not compete for registration business with
> the US
> patent office--both provide completely incomparable services and
> protections. But
> there is no doubt that a gTLD registry competes for registration business
> with
> other gTLDs and with ccTLDs. Ergo, whereas patent offices must be
> territorial
> monopolies, registries need not be.
> 
> > By having a low-price/good-service-to-registrars registry, registrars
> have
> > quite a lot of flexibility on the price they can charge to a final
> > customer, as well as choosing what level of service they want to give.
> The
> > final price of a domain (for a user) will be fixed by market conditions.
> > The price will include a fixed component (cost of the registry) and a
> > variable component added by the registrar, charging for his services.
> 
> But the most important part of the business is the cost and service of the
> registry. All the rest is secondary.
> 
> --
> m i l t o n   m u e l l e r // m u e l l e r @ s y r . e d u
> syracuse university          http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/
>