There is no merit to this proposal because there are no impacts on technical stability of the net.

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This issue is purely one of economic and business regulation.

There is no issue here that relates to the technical stability of the 
internet as measured in terms of the ability of the upper layers of DNS 
to quickly, efficiently, and accurately transform DNS query packets into 
DNS reply packets without prejudice against any query source or query name.
In other words, what is being discussed here is an imposition on the 
marketplace of domain names for no purpose other than manipulation of 
that marketplace.
There is no technical reason why ICANN should have any policy on this 
matter.
For ICANN to impose regulation in this area would be for ICANN, once 
agin, to engage in social and economic regulation that is not warranted 
by any risk to the technical infrastructure of the net and DNS.
We all know that Overstock will turn heaven and earth to buy "o.com" for 
whatever price is asked.
The only question is what should Verisign, the .com registry, do with 
the proceeds?
Should the registry be allowed to retain those proceeds as a windfall 
profit?
Or should the registry be required to use those proceeds to buy down the 
outrageous, fiat $7+ registry fee (using .com as an example of registry 
fees) and thus spreading the benefit to all registrants?
The latter approach is more in keeping with the original idea that 
registries were to be largely nothing more than a cost+ service provider.
                --karl--
                Karl Auerbach
                Former, and only, publicly elected ICANN Director
                for North America