Re: [wg-c] Unofficial report on L.A. meeting

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

> 1) My understanding from conversations with a well-known anti-trust
> attorney is that this is not the case -- NSI is clearly a special
> case.  However, I am not a lawyer, either.  Perhaps some lawyers on 
> the list would care to comment?
> 2) They can certainly be constrained to be price controlled.

Well, there are Kent's 2 posts for the day, so here's my second and I
guess I get the last word.

Kent says that he's told it's not antitrust. I have no idea, perhaps it
is not. It is certainly, however, unfair. Think about it - the goal here
is to provide competition. How can you do that if you allow the
incumbent to proceed as they wish, while constraining new entries
to a business model?

As to NSI being constrained to being price controlled, that's not
the same thing as non-profit, is it? I'll make it simple - you get
them price controlled, and I'll agree that new registries should
be similarly price-controlled.

I can't think of a more fair compromise.

In short - new registries get the same terms as NSI. If you don't
like those terms, then change them for NSI as well. If you cannot,
the argument's over. If you can, it's also over. 

The ball's in your court.

Wow, the last word over Kent today. I like it. See you tomorrow.

Christopher