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

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> I don't know how we differentiate between AMEX and, say, BLOG  (for
> which I have a trademark).

I agree - that is NOT the distinction we want to make. 

> If AMEX can operate with one, self-owned registrar and no registrar fees
> for second level .AMEX names,  can I have this same model for second
> level .BLOG names?

Are you 
a) directly assigning the names to people within your own organization and not 
charging? 
b) selling them to third parties at their own request and initiative? 
c) giving them away to third parties at their own request and initiative? 

I think we'd both agree that if b) is the case, you're a vertically integrated 
registryar (neat term, eh?) and should pay the same ICANN fees as other 
industry competitors in that market. We should, however, have a long term 
discussion about what those fees are and whether the playing field is tilted or 
level for integrated and separated firms.

I think we'd both agree, also, that if a) is the case, there is no need for 
registrars and the whole registrar-registry fee model doesn't make a lot of 
sense. You have suggested that such entities should pay the same registrar fees 
anyway. Imho that is not an unreasonable position, because of the possibilities 
of gaming, but I am not favorable to it and would like to find a way to avoid 
it without opening the door to gaming.

The difficult issues revolve around c). 

--MM