Re: [ga] RE: ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting
- To: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ga] RE: ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting
- From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:00:27 -0800
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
only goal, which is by the way achievable, and achievable with relative ease,
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.
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
"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]
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
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
> 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]
> 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
> 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