Re: [bc-gnso] Registry/Registrar Separation

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

um...

i think there's more nuance there.

the reason i started registering domain names in 1993 was because i  
wanted my own email domain.  i tried to get oconnor.com but it was  
taken.  so i settled for haven.com instead.
many years later, i finally got my name in a domain name --  
oconnor.pro.  so i'm an example of a guy who hand-registered a name in  
a new gTLD that i couldn't get in an existing one.  unfortunately,  
right after i got that name, i accidentally sold that first domain  
(haven.com) for a boatload of money and wound up retiring from the  
".pro" world.  life's funny that way...
sure, there's money to be made in premium name auctions and  
monitization.  but a LOT of people will ALSO be able to get names that  
they can't get otherwise.  there's room for both, methinks.  i truly  
don't think the actors in this drama are evil, they're just  
approaching the problem from a different point of view.  the  
conversation that's visible by email during the Seoul meeting  
convinces me that we're getting better at seeing those different  
points of view and coming to constructive agreements that can meet the  
needs of all.  we're not great at it yet, but we're getting better.   
let's keep working on that.
mikey


On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:37 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote:

> (for those of you not here in Seoul)
> Below is what I said (not on behalf of BC) today at the Public  
> Forum, regarding Rr/Ry separation.
> I Listened to debate over separation. inconclusive (both sides  
> passionate and articulate)
> > But I did learn about motivations for Registrars wanting to run  
> > Registries
> > I learned about innovative methods for monetizing premium names.
> What I learned tells me ICANN should reset public expectations about  
> benefits of new TLDs.
> > Let’s start being more transparent about the way names will and  
> > won’t be available to the public.
> > Let’s limit disappointment when TLDs launch.
> >
> > And let’s make it less likely that the review team on Competition ,  
> > Consumer Trust, and Choice will give ICANN a failing grade.
> For years, the Rhetoric of expectations has been:  we need new TLDs  
> to give registrants all those “good names that are unavailable in  
> current TLDs.
> That’s the rhetoric.  What’s the reality?
> > Reality 1: new gTLD applicants will maximize profits on premium  
> > names, whether by selling them at diff prices, or by having an  
> > affiliate park the domain with advertising.  That name is never  
> > going be available to a registrant that wants to use it for content  
> > or commerce.
> > Reality 2: will see Innovative ways to identify and control premium  
> > names at launch, and then afterwards, when words and phrases  
> > suddenly acquire premium value ( h1n1.whatever)
> There’s Nothing illegal about that, and new Ry contracts allow  
> uncapped and variable premium pricing.  And you don’t have to own a  
> registrar to monetize your names – I’ve been educated about that.
> But let’s stop kidding ourselves and the internet public about how  
> new TLDs will let ordinary people register names they want but can’t  
> get today.
> --
> Steve DelBianco
> Executive Director
> NetChoice
> http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org
> +1.202.420.7482
- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109
fax             866-280-2356
web     www.haven2.com
handle	OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,  
Google, etc.)