Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] VI Use Case Template, Single Registrant TLDs

[<jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx>]

Richard,

That was well formulated and mostly corresponds to my idea about a brand TLD. 
Only thing I want to add is that 1,000 names might not be that much to my mind. 
Corporations are currently using a lot of 3rd level names for localized 
services or host names which multiplies the number of names needed. In a brand 
TLD these would translate into 2nd level names.

BR,

-jr


On 5.4.2010 6.20, "ext Richard Tindal" <richardtindal@xxxxxx> wrote:



Regarding Single Registrant TLDs.   I've always thought of them as spaces where 
all registered second level names are owned, and all websites/ emails operated, 
 by the entity itself  -- as opposed to the entity's customers, members, 
employees, affiliates, etc.

So if IBM had .IBM it could use it for sites like careers.ibm, products.ibm, 
news.ibm, and the ECLU could use theirs for sites like advocate.eclu, 
volunteer.eclu, resources.eclu etc.     The current DAG accommodates this 
scenario.  The DAG requires this type of registry to register the names through 
an accredited registrar -- who would likely charge the registry a slight markup 
on the registry fee, plus the ICANN registrar fees.   If the registry 
registered 1,000 names for its own use (which seems like a lot to me) the 
registrar markup plus registrar fees on those names would probably cost the 
registry less than $500 per year.

Having said the DAG accommodates this business scenario,  I'm not opposed to 
changing current rules so this type of registry entity could also become a 
registrar in its own TLD.  I'm also OK with waiving normal registrar fees for 
this sort of registry-registrar -- as it's not creating registrant-focused 
workload for ICANN.

However,  if the Single Registrant TLD offers names to other parties 
(customers, members, employees, etc) for use by those parties I think the 
equation has changed.   The registry is now using second level domain names as 
a tool to compete in acquiring customers, members, employees, etc.    It is 
also competing with other TLDs who use the multiple registrar model and whose 
names are subject to regular registrar fees.   In that situation I think the 
Single Registrant TLD should also be subject to registrar fees.    I think it 
creates an uneven playing field if .AMEX competes with .WEB for customers but 
.AMEX does not have to pay registrar fees.

So, in a nutshell, I draw a distinction between Single Registrant TLDs where 
names are only operated by the registry entity,  and Single Registrant TLDs 
where names are provided to other parties.

Look forward to discussing this on tonight's call

RT


On Apr 5, 2010, at 1:02 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

>
> hi,
>
> or the example i have been considering:
>
> the Erehwonistan civil liberties union (ECLU) - active in rescuing  and 
> defending political prisoners in Erehwonistan,  which intends to provide a 
> free domain name registration to all of it members as part of its membership 
> package and supporters as thanks for their donations.  but given the human 
> rights situation in Erehwonistan, evidenced by recent problems Infinityplex 
> had with the governement of Erehwonistan, all of the whois entries refer to 
> the ECLU information office which deals with (proxies?) any necessary 
> communications with members.
>
> is this a single registrant (note i think so)?
> does it need a registrar, or need to be a registrar,  to distribute the names?
> which fees does it need to pay ICANN for its public service work?  and why?
>
> a.
>
> On 4 Apr 2010, at 10:14, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
>
>> To give an example of something we don't yet _know_, we don't yet
>> _know_ if when we say "single registrant" we are referring to
>> .quixotic-persona" and some few entrants, say .waiting-for-godot and
>> the entries "vladimir" and "estragon", or a capital or liability
>> accumulation of very large size and a very large class of persons with
>> a relationship to the accumulation, say .dukes-v-walmart with a
>> zonefile consisting entries for each of the 1.6 million women employed
>> at Walmart since 12/26/98, and plaintiff's counsel, defendant's
>> counsel, their witnesses and pleadings, and the courts.
>>
>> We simply don't know if "SR" means
>> {abuse,legal,marketing,sales}.soap-corp or something the size of .org.
>
>