RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] What do we mean by "single registrant"?

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Roberto,

A reasonable approach perhaps. But how long will this take? How much can
this group tackle reasonably well and still complete in time to have an
influence on the DAG? Honestly, from our perspective, since we have no
current plans to apply for new TLDs it makes no difference to us. But
that's not the situation others are in. Is the group okay with the first
round rolling out under the conditions the Board resolved to in Nairobi?
If not, we need to be realistic about what can be done.

The policy does not address Singletons, but there is nothing in the DAG
preventing brand owners from applying for gTLDs as long as they can live
with the same rules as everyone else. I propose we leave it at that and
address it further when there is less risk of a rush job that will miss
considering some consequence on either registrants or competition. 


Tim 
 
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] What do we mean by "single registrant"?
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, April 05, 2010 3:03 pm
To: <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>


As a co-chair, I would like to stay hands off as much as possible, and
not
have my own ideas influencing the group, but I believe that every now
and
then it might be good to provide opinions, in particular if they take
the
shape of questions rather than assertions.

So, from what I have listened so far, I believe that a part of the folks
on
the WG would like to make the VI model available for some TLDs, to be
better
defined, that we can call "Single Registrant" (or a better name to be
crafted). The main reason for allowing the vertical integration is the
fact
that in some cases the registrars do not provide an added value.
On the other hand, there are concerns that allowing VI for these
"Singleton"
(yes, my past as researcher in abstract algebra gets into the way here)
TLDs
could give them a competitive advantage on other TLDs, who are obliged
to
use ICANN-accredited registrars, because they can use direct channels to
distribute names.

So, it seems to me that we need to define some criteria for these
"Singletons", ensuring that we limit these TLDs to cases where there
will be
no competition with the other TLDs.
Questions that might apply are:
1) What is the use of the TLD, in the sense that registrants (or "users
of the 2nd level domains", since we might have a distribution channel
that
is different from "domain name registration" as we intend it currently)
should not use the name in this TLD as an alternative to a name in a
"general purpose" TLD? - otherwise it will take business away from the
market in favour of a competitor with preferential rules
2) Do we have a size issue, and how relevant is it? - in other words,
does it change if there are 10, 1K, 1M SLDs in the TLD, and why?
3) Is this limited to "brands", or "commercial", or not? - in other
words, is this limited to cases discussed before like .ibm or .bmw for
products or employees, or can I use a .friendsofroberto for my friends?
4) Which SLD rules would apply, which not, and why? - for instance
(sorry, Avri, for using a potential WG-killer subject), do we have
behaviour
rules for the WhoIs? (incidentally, I note that the answer to this
question
might well depend on the answer to Q1)

I am sure there are more questions.
Cheers,
Roberto