Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 04:06:56PM -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
> This is a very weak response.

Please note that the response is to your general proposition 
concerning national governments regulating registries.

> Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> > Getting congress/fcc involved is a huge overhead, and, while it might
> > happen in the extreme egregious case you mentioned, it is not clear
> > that these agencies would be at all effective, or even interested,
> > in less dramatic cases.
> 
> Congress is already involved and interested. The FCC isinterested.

I agree -- the NSI case is extreme and egregious.  Even so, 1)
congress's involvement was motivated because of a much larger issue
-- internet governance in general; and 2) in fact Congress has *done*
nothing except hold hearings, and it appears doubtful that it will do
anything more than hold hearings.  NSI/SAIC called in some favors in
Bliley's office and got the hearings held, but after NSI got raked
over the coals enthusiasm has subsided considerably.  We most likely
won't see any activity whatsoever from Congress as far as NSI is
concerned, unless NTIA blows it.

> > NSI could blackmail Songbird into paying
> > $135/year instead of the current $35, and with 100,000
> > songbird-sized businesses, that would add $10M/year to their
> > bottom line.
> 
> Uh...no, it couldn't. NSI the registry can only charge you$9/year, and
> you are free to switch to any other registrar.
> Is this news to you?

Sorry -- I was speaking of the situation that would exist if NSI was 
operating under the regime you suggested.  I thought that would be 
clear.

Nevertheless, you did not address the point, which is that a 
registry operating unconstrained except for Congressional
oversight has ample opportunity to gouge small businesses or 
individuals.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain