Re: [wg-c] Two Para D&I Summary (PPE)

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

>       Of course, the ccTLDs certainly are not done this way.  But for
> new unrestricted new gTLDs, is there any reason why they should not run
> as a shared registry, or subject to price regulation?

If you are contending that this is NSI's current situation, then you are
correct. The price was negotiated between NSI and DoC, and
set at $6. To say that new registries must operate in the same
manner would be correct.

This is not, however, a "cost recovery" situation by any means.

I would contend that the word "unrestricted" in your question above
would be striken. This would be the model for ALL new TLDs
created. Basing economic requirements upon business model
is discriminatory, at best.

>      Also, on a related issue, is there any reason a profit making
> company that wanted to run a gTLD registry should be able to get a
> contract similiar to the NSI contract, prehaps with a clause regarding
> price caps?

That's not a related issue, it's the same issue. See answer above.

--
Christopher Ambler
chris@the.web