Proposed Agreements Similar to Eliminating Network Neutrality

["Dan C. Rinnert" <dcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

August 28, 2006

To the ICANN Board of Directors:

The proposed agreements for the .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registries very 
closely resemble what broadband providers in the U.S. want to do.
As Vint Cerf wrote in his letter to Congress, outlining Google's 
support of Network Neutrality:
"The remarkable social impact and economic success of the Internet is 
in many ways directly attributable to the architectural 
characteristics that were part of its design. The Internet was 
designed with no gatekeepers over new content or services. The 
Internet is based on a layered, end-to-end model that allows people 
at each level of the network to innovate free of any central control. 
By placing intelligence at the edges rather than control in the 
middle of the network, the Internet has created a platform for 
innovation. This has led to an explosion of offerings - from VOIP to 
802.11x wi-fi to blogging - that might never have evolved had central 
control of the network been required by design."
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/11/vint-cerf-speaks-out-on-net-neutrality.html

By eliminating price controls and using language that permits 
registries to implement variable by domain pricing, ICANN is creating 
a group of gatekeepers who have control over new content and services 
and who can hamper the ability of people to innovate free of any 
central control.
If a registry operator disagrees with a political or other opinion 
site, what is to prevent them from effectively silencing the web site 
by pricing their domain name renewal exorbitantly high?
What incentive will there be to innovate, when being successful could 
mean losing your domain name due to extraordinary price increases?
Or, what if the reverse occurs?  What if the registries raise pricing 
across the board, but then lower pricing to favored entities?
In either case, the registries become the gatekeepers.  They become 
the central control over the Internet.
There can be big money in giving preferential treatment to some 
money-laden individuals and businesses over others, as broadband 
providers in the U.S. are well aware.  The question is, if these 
scant few broadband providers cannot be trusted to deliver services 
fairly in a supposedly free market, then how can a scant few registry 
operators be trusted to deliver services fairly in a supposedly free 
market?
The proposed .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry agreements as currently 
written should not be approved.
Regards,
Dan C. Rinnert