Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Idea of Phasing

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Unless the GAC's idea of categories gains traction...

Le 24 mars 2010 à 15:03, Tim Ruiz a écrit :

> 
> Keep in mind tat there are no specific requirements that must be met to
> be designated as a community TLD. It is a self selection thing. The only
> time any criteria is applied to such a claim is if there is contention
> for a string AND a self-designated community applicant chooses
> comparative review. Staff has confirmed that more than once.
> 
> So giving community designated TLDs a blanket exception on VI while
> everyone else must operate under different rules only creates an
> opportunity for gaming.
> 
> 
> Tim 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Idea of Phasing
> From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, March 24, 2010 6:22 am
> To: Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> On 3/24/10 11:24 AM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> ...
>> So the question on whether community-based TLDs have a business need to be
>> treated differently from general-purpose TLDs does make a lot of sense.
> 
> 
> Agree. To claim to the contrary would be to claim that there is only
> one business model, implemented with marginally different prices and
> nominally (to make a pun) distinct inventories, the incumbent monopoly
> business model, originally implemented by the COM, NET, and ORG
> operator, and now available in the COM and NET and ORG operators,
> unchanged, and the BIZ and INFO operators.
> 
> We don't want to come out of this with a solution for Verisign's
> market that destroys or prevents all others.
> 
> Eric
> 
>