Re: [wg-c] Re: Importance of the Registry

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

Some interesting points are made here.

Kevin J. Connolly wrote:

> There is a difference between, for example, between
> Calvin Klein's monopoly of CKone fragrance and the created monopoly
> of granting control over a top level domain by fiat.  The former protects
> both the public and private interest in "brandedness" of goods and
> services, preventing free riding and ensuring that consumers can be
> informed as to the characteristics and quality of what they purchase;

There is no difference at all, and this is precisely the reason why some of us want
to create space for exclusive gTLDs. The uniqueness of the TLD and the exclusive
right to administer the TLD extension "brands" a domain name. It means that customers
come to associate a certain class of domain names with a specific service provider.
The logic is exactly the same as the logic behind trademark. When you see a
<www.name.xxx> domain, for example, you *know* that it is a porn site and it may come
to be associated with unique technical or business features.

> latter is simply the outright grant of valuable rights for the enrichment of a
> single individual or enterprise.  It's hard to see the difference between
> (A) granting exclusive rights to control the .any registry to a profit-making
> developer and (B) Jacobean grants of land in the New World to relatives
> and cronies as proprietary colonies.

The illegitimacy of the colonial grants of land stemmed from the fact that other
people already lived on the land, and that the claims were enforced by conquest. But
please tell me, assuming that you do believe in the right to privately own and
develop land, how does one establish a legitimate claim to ownership to real
property? Generally, it comes from first occupation and from some form of use. Or it
comes from a grant by a government authority; e.g., the great Oklahoma land rush in
the US, in which government turned state-owned land over to private homesteaders.

(Parenthetically, any land tract is a "monopoly" in the same sense that gTLDs are
"monopolies"--its location and terrain and features make it slightly different from
any other tract of land. Is this an argument for global socialism? Clearly not. There
are markets for real estate.)

I don't see why private parties shouldn't gain an exclusive right to administer a
zone file in a similar manner. Again, I advocate this within the context of also
creating shared registries. There are advantages and disadvantages to the proprietary
model, as there are to the shared model. We can do both.

> On the other hand, if we establish criteria for registry operations which
> include (A) shared registration systems and (B) _some_ mechanism for
> preventing the owner/operator of the registry from exacting monopoly
> profits, then we have a system which will enhance the growth of the
> Internet.  I am not going to suggest that we erect an Internet Rate
> Commission which would have the power to control registry prices.

This is a key point that is not appreciated well enough by most discussants. Under a
shared system, the registry monopoly still exists. The real check on it is not the
existence of multiple competing registrars, but whatever system of *regulation* is
imposed on the registry. This is clearly evident in opening up com net and org. The
cost reduction came not from registrar competition, but from a NTIA contract that
fixed the wholesale price at a regulated level.

One of the things that bothers me about the shared registry option is that many
people seem to have in mind a *single* global shared registry. This is a Bad Idea.
Such a centralization of regulatory control has technical, economic, and political
drawbacks that are too numerous to mention here.

The other "regulatory" model, discussed by Kevin below, is much better. It relies on
shared ownership rather than government regulation. But the model is much more
workable and desireable in a diverse setting.

Look at Nominet as a model for diverse, competing clusters of  gTLDs that are shared
by a bunch of registrars but exclusive to that group. You say, this is a "shared
model." I say, yes, but the organization Nominet has *exclusive* control of the right
to register names under dot UK. In either case, you are handing out an exclusive
property right. So perhaps we should tone down the rhetoric a bit and talk about what
works.

In fact, I suspect that most so-called exclusive registries would develop marketing
relationships with registrars. I just prefer a market organization that gives room to
all models, and that lets the selection of the model itself be a response to the
market and to consumer preferences, and not imposed on them.

> Finally,   I think we need to convince the NTIA that the system ultimately put
> into place will not require ongoing governmental oversight.

Nothing would make NTIA happier!

--
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/