Re: [ga] RE: ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dominik and all,

  Thank you Dominik for expressing your well observed observations.  In part, 
I, along with
our members agree, elimination of Domain Name Tasting/ Front running should be 
the
only goal, which is by the way achievable, and achievable with relative ease, 
IMHO.

  It seems clear to me, and I am sure others, that the ICANN Bod, sees a revenue
stream from Domain Name Tasting/Front Running, and as such doesn't desire
to eliminate this practice, but would rather seek a means by which to profit
from it, however unfairly and disproportionately so.

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827

Dominik Filipp wrote:

> Dear Dr. Twomey,
>
> I have just read the recommended action considered by the ICANN Board on 
> Domain Tasting, which is applying the standard ICANN $0.20 fee on 
> re-registration (or disproportionate deletes).
>
> I have no idea how the Board has come to this decision, especially, when the 
> Domain Tasting issue is still under debate and the policy development process 
> has not finished yet. I recall that the issue was first opened by introducing 
> the Request for Information on Domain Tasting 10 August 2007 initiated by the 
> ALAC and adopted by the GNSO "to form an ad hoc group for further 
> fact-finding on the effects of this practice". After gathering the initial 
> information the GNSO opened another period for commenting the issue, named 
> GNSO Initial Report on Domain Tasting. The commenting period officially 
> finished on 28 Jan. 2008. I particularly accent the word "Initial" here as 
> the document in its Conclusions and Next Steps on page 24 reads:
>
> "The practice of domain tasting is of significant concern to many 
> constituencies and community stakeholders. These concerns have been explored 
> for the past several months, as reflected in the Issues Report prepared by 
> ICANN staff, and by the extensive research and data gathering conducted by 
> the Ad Hoc Group of the GNSO Council and reflected in the Outcomes Report. 
> Based on these reports, the GNSO Council has voted to initiate a policy 
> development process to explore the specific policy changes that should be 
> made to curb domain tasting. This initial report is an early step in this 
> process, and will be posted for public comment for 20 days as prescribed by 
> the ICANN bylaws (see http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA). Public 
> comments will then be incorporated into a "Final Report" by ICANN staff and 
> submitted to the GNSO Council Chair within ten calendar days following the 
> end of the public comment period. The Final Report (along with the preceding 
> Issues Report and O!
>  utcomes Report) become the underlying foundation for subsequent actions 
> taken by the GNSO Council in formulating recommendations to the ICANN Board 
> regarding policy changes that should be made to address domain tasting."
>
> As regards the AGP concept, I again recall that the ICANN community has 
> explicitly expressed a desire to eliminate the AGP as it is apparent in the 
> straw poll (the online survey) held by 15 Sep. 2007. The result of the survey 
> concerning the AGP is summarized on page 16 in Outcomes Report of The GNSO Ad 
> Hoc Group On Domain Name Tasting issued on 4 Oct. 2007, and reads:
>
> "110 out of 173 (64%) support suggestion A (eliminating AGP), while 25 (14%) 
> prefer suggestion C (registry excess deletion fees charged to registrars for 
> disproportionate deletes), 17 (10%) support B (ICANN 0.20 USD charge to apply 
> to names deleted within AGP) and 20 (12%) vote for D (neither A, B or C)..."
>
> In other words, the suggestion currently recommended by the Board to consider 
> has gained the least support among all other suggestions. As the survey was 
> accessible to anyone including representatives from Registries, Registrars, 
> Registrants as well as standard Internet users, I consider the result of the 
> survey legitimate.
> Also the comment contributions in both related mailing lists held on the 
> issue so far indicates prevailing interest in the elimination of the AGP.
>
> I therefore cannot find a merit supporting your optimistic words in the 
> sentence "This idea came from the ICANN community and we think it is a viable 
> solution the Internet community has been seeking". But what I have understood 
> of this hurry politely ignoring the legitimate voice is that something is 
> baking behind the scenes. Something like ICANN is tending to give in to a 
> sweet temptation to tacitly participate on the tasting business. To the 
> detriment of the most important part, which are Registrants, and which is the 
> main body making bread for ICANN and as such deserving the respective care 
> and advocate.
>
> I, among many others, do not see the re-registration fee an effective 
> solution. I elaborated on this in one of my mails sent to the mailing list 
> and pointed out some ways how successful tasters could 'recover' from the fee 
> provision and keep the business running. Sure, the business will go down but 
> it stays alive as a phenomenon using just more subtle methods to survive. Or 
> profit, with all the malicious side-effects we know about. I think the best 
> solution is to eliminate the problem, not to make it smaller. Moreover, as 
> Karl Auerbach pointed out in a mail posted on the mailing list, the AGP 
> concept was never properly addressed or discussed before approving the 
> registry agreements. In my opinion this means that the credibility of such a 
> concept is rather weak and keeping it alive at any price just reveals 
> speculative incentives in mind.
> I understand that eliminating the AGP could bring problems, such as typo 
> corrections, credit card frauds, etc., but the fact is that the cons 
> extremely overweigh the pros. After all, the ways how to overcome these 
> problems can still be subject to further discussion during the upcoming 
> policy development process.
>
> I would therefore kindly ask you to encourage the GNSO council to fluently 
> and peacefully proceed with the policy development process. Any prediction of 
> how the solution should look like at the moment is premature and 
> controversial. The issue has still to be carefully broken down and properly 
> discussed. Maybe now, under the new leadership, we could find courage to take 
> a deep breath and set out the right direction.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Dominik Filipp, a General Assembly List member
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 8:13 AM
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ga] ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting
>
> [To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org]
> [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org]
> [To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org]
>
> http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-29jan08.htm
> ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting
>
> Suggested fee change would effectively eliminate tasting
>
> 29 January 2008
>
> MARINA DEL REY, Calif.: The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and 
> Numbers is looking to effectively end domain tasting with a proposal to start 
> charging the annual ICANN fee on registrar domain registrations.
>
> Domain tasting is the use of the Add Grace Period to test the profitability 
> of a domain name registration. The AGP is a five-day period following the 
> initial registration of a domain name when the registration may be deleted 
> and a credit can be issued to a registrar.
>
> "Domain tasting has been an issue for the Internet community and ICANN is 
> offering this proposal as a way to stop tasting," said Dr Paul Twomey, 
> ICANN's President and CEO. "Charging the ICANN fee as soon as a domain name 
> is registered would close the loophole used by tasters to test a domain 
> name's profitability for free."
>
> AGP was originally introduced by registries so registrars could avoid costs 
> if a domain name was mistyped or misspelled during the registration process. 
> It is part of the .com, .net, .org, .info, .name, .pro, and .biz registry 
> contracts.
>
> Tasting has been a serious challenge for the Internet community and has grown 
> exponentially since 2004. In January 2007 the top 10 domain tasters accounted 
> for 95% of all deleted .com and .net domain names - or
> 45,450,897 domain names out of 47,824,131 total deletes.
>
> The proposal will be part of the ICANN budget process for the fiscal year 
> starting 1 July 2008. The early draft version of that budget will be released 
> for and discussed at ICANN's New Delhi meeting later this month. After public 
> discussions of this proposal and other budget issues, the proposed budget 
> will be released for addition discussions by
> 17 May 2008 and be voted on at the board meeting to be held during the ICANN 
> meeting in Paris in June. ICANN accredited registrars representing two-thirds 
> of fees collected will be asked to approve the proposal.
>
> "This idea came from the ICANN community and we think it is a viable solution 
> the Internet community has been seeking," Dr Twomey added.
> --
> Glen de Saint Géry
> GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
> gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
> http://gnso.icann.org