[wg-c] Competition policy and gTLDs

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

I'm creating a new thread in response to John Lewis's message.

john.c.lewis@bt.com wrote:

> 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.

I do not agree. However, this is the sort of discussion we ought
to be having.

There is cross-elasticity of demand between gTLDs, which means
that end users view them as competitive substitutes for each
other. There is even provable cross-elasticity between ccTLDs
and gTLDs; which is why, for example, highly restrictive ccTLDs
like .FR have high rates of registration in the gTLD dot com.

Competition policy regulators do not base their determinations
of monopoly on flat, unsubtantiated claims such as the one
above. They attempt to determine the level of cross-elasticity
of demand to determine what goods or services compete with each
other. It is a measurable variable.

As long as the name is different, no gTLD is a *perfect*
substitute for another, but no one attempts to adhere to the
ideal of perfect competition. A Toyota Camry is not a perfect
substitute for a Subaru Legacy or a Ford Taurus. The products
are differentiated. But there is a great deal of competition
among those product lines. The level of cross-elasticity
diminishes as the products become more different, e.g., in some
sense a used 1978 Honda Civic competes in the car market with a
new Lexus, but few consumers would be in the market for both.

The same is true of gTLDs. As long as the market is open, there
will be competition across gTLD registries. Registering under
.zone would be a competitive alternative to registering under
.web, for example. The proposed .shop would have a highly
competitive alternative to many, many registrants currently
under .com. Even open ccTLDs like .NU and .CC are actively
marketing themselves as alternatives to dot com.

Obviously, considerations of demand cross-elasticity ought to
play a role in the selection of names. Which is another reason
why more is better.

Of couse, introducing competition at the registrar level does
not eliminate any monopoly power the registry might have.


> > -----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.
> > >



--
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/