Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] FW: Aftermarket Perspective

[Bob Mountain <bmountain@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Matt,
Thanks for your feedback, appreciate the thought you¹ve put into this.  Our
original intent was to put together a few prepatory questions in advance of
discussions we would have with the various types of aftermarket players.  We
didn¹t intend to run a formal survey per se.  This was more a matter of
digging deeper into a segment that we felt had some pretty strong feelings
about ETRP, and a way to find out if their objections were based on a lack
of understanding of some of the concepts within ETRP.  We also wanted to try
to get some indication of the scope of the problem within this sector.

That said I¹m happy to broaden the cohorts if the group feels this is the
right thing to do.  Would welcome comments and suggested other people we
should include.

Best!
Mtn.



On 9/9/10 4:23 PM, "Matt Serlin" <matt.serlin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Apologies for the few days delay on this, but I wanted to think through the
> points which were raised on the call the other day in relation to what my
> initial response was.
>  
> After thinking through it more, I would like to reiterate the concerns
> expressed on the call earlier this week. While I think the idea of this survey
> is a very good idea, I do not support the notion of sending this to a specific
> segment of the registrant community as the results we get back will be
> obviously skewed toward that narrow perspective.
>  
> I will support whatever the group decides, but will continue to push for wider
> distribution of this survey so as to collect more meaningful, community-wide
> feedback.
>  
> Regards,
> Matt
>  
> 
> 
> From: owner-gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 9:27 AM
> To: Mike O'Connor
> Cc: Bob Mountain; Steele,Barbara; Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx; Sedo ::
> Simonetta Batteiger
> Subject: RE: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] FW: Aftermarket Perspective
>  
> 
> Good points, Mikey.
> 
>  
> 
> And to expand on my thoughts on the call, perhaps it would be useful to
> differentiate between "direct" and "indirect" harms associated with hijacking
> when asking for experiences.
> 
>  
> 
> Direct Harm = Had a name hijacked or unknowingly purchased a hijacked name.
> 
>  
> 
> Indirect Harm = The costs associated with performing due diligence, etc., to
> ensure that one's inventory is not tainted by hijacked names.  Also negative
> PR / public perception for an individual company or the entire aftermarket
> industry due to the co-mingling of legitimate and illicit inventory.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> J.
> 
>  
>> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] FW: Aftermarket Perspective
>> From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue, September 07, 2010 10:12 am
>> To: "Sedo :: Simonetta Batteiger" <simonetta@xxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Bob Mountain <bmountain@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Steele, Barbara"
>> <BSteele@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx"
>> <Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> here is my contribution to the survey (following up on my comments on the
>> call today).
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> it would be nice to insert a line of questioning into the survey that goes
>> something like this:
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> -- do you support the goal of rapidly returning a hijacked domain to its
>> owner?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> -- if you support the goal of rapid-return of a hijacked domain, but disagree
>> with the approach taken by the WG, what approach would you suggest instead?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> regarding Matt's point (about who receives the survey)...  maybe one way out
>> would be to clearly state the **use** of the information gathered.  i share
>> Matt's concern that we are seeking an intentionally-biased sample right now.
>> so if the results of this survey are going to be the basis of determining
>> policy then we need a broader sample.  but if the use of the survey is to
>> inform policy-making, and it is made clear that this is not a representative
>> group and their views may not prevail when balanced against the broader
>> community of stakeholders, then i'd be OK going with a narrow focus.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> mikey
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> On Sep 3, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Sedo :: Simonetta Batteiger wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you for your input! I will be on vacation September 7th through 15th
>> and will miss our workgroup calls during that time.
>> 
>> I will coordinate with Bob on who I can start contacting in the coming week
>> anyway so that we don¹t lose much additional time.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Simonetta
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Bob Mountain [mailto:bmountain@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 11:38 AM
>> To: Steele, Barbara; Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: Sedo :: Simonetta Batteiger
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] FW: Aftermarket Perspective
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Thanks Barbara!
>> Mtn.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/3/10 11:32 AM, "Steele, Barbara" <BSteele@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> <x-msg://791/BSteele@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks to Bob and Simonetta for pulling this together.  I think that it looks
>> very good.  I would recommend a few modifications for clarity and to solicit
>> detailed feedback vs. yes/no responses.  I have highlighted the recommended
>> modifications in red in the text below.  Thanks again for drafting this.
>>  
>> 
>> Barbara Steele 
>> Compliance Officer / Director of Policy
>> 
>> From: owner-gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx
>> <x-msg://791/owner-gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx>
>> [mailto:owner-gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bob Mountain
>> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 12:41 PM
>> To: Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx <x-msg://791/Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Simonetta Batteiger
>> Subject: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] FW: Aftermarket Perspective
>> 
>> Hello everyone, 
>> On the Aug 24 call James Bladel asked Simonetta and I to gather some
>> aftermarket perspective on ETRP.   We¹ve put together a list of questions and
>> a number of aftermarket cohorts.  Please feel free to reply with any comments
>> or suggestions by end of day Monday Sept 6.  We¹ll begin reaching out next
>> week.
>> 
>> Best!
>> Mtn.
>>  
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Robert J. Mountain
> Vice President, Business Development
> NameMedia, Inc.
> mtn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> C: +1-508-878-0469
> O: +1-781-839-2871
> F: +1-781-839-2801