RE: [wg-c] Exclusions

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

> >Makes sense to me - Indeed I would go further and suggest that any person
> >or company that has a significant interest in an already existing TLD (to
> >my mind, *any* TLD, whether gTLD, ccTLD, or otherwise) ought to be
> >encouraged to fully focus on developing the asset it already has and not
> >be permitted to obtain a second bite from the TLD apple.

> I understand your intent (restraint of monopoly behavior). But there is a
> significant body of law and economic theory which might be applied to this
> concept which still allows for unconstrained business activity and
> promotion of efficiencies, without any subjective "morally-based' restraint
> of trade, so to speak.

Well, if new TLDs could be created on a whim so that there is no
artificial scarcity, then I'd agree that we might be doing something
that has some bad side effects.

But given that we are apparently going to have artifical scarcity of
TLDs for the indeterminate future I prefer that we encourage more
players rather than players with multiple positions.

I believe that any registry or registrar ought to develop its asset to
the best of its ability and not, by virtue of occupying two seats at
the DNS table, prevent some other potential operator from having a chance
to do something good and wonderful.


		--karl--