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

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

That will be very interesting to read, I look forward to it

I am, however,  curious as to whether any those users/registrant/consumers have 
ever commented in favor of VI, or have requested CO, let alone VI. 

Since that is the criteria some are recommending as a barrier to discussing VI 
for SR, I do believe that criteria should be applied equally to discussions on 
all other aspects of VI or CO.

a.

On 6 Apr 2010, at 16:40, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:

> Avri -  I will be submitting an addendum to the list that outlines what I 
> believe the benefits to the users/registrants/consumers will be with the 
> introduction of Vertical Integration
> 
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 1:22 PM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] What do we mean by "single registrant"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> If we see a lot of public comments during this PDP in favor of an SRSU model
>> then lets certainly spend more time on it.    Up until now it's a solution
>> in search of a problem (for this round).   
> 
> 
> Out of curiosity have we seen any strong interest from consumers, registrants 
> or users in moving away from the Board's position on 0CO?  
> 
> While I have spoken to people in the non commercial sector and elsewhere who 
> are interested in free distribution of second level TLDs to their members, I 
> have spoken to no one in the non commercial world who is interested in moving 
> beyond the zero co-ownership status that has been mandated by the Board.  
> From this perspective can anyone outline what the advantages are to users and 
> registrants of any co-ownership arrangements?  I understand why for profit 
> registries and registrars are interested as it is a good business opportunity 
> for them, but do not see it doing anything good for the users.
> 
> As we have accepted that service of the registrants and users, in their dual 
> role as consumers and creators of the Internet, is the primary purpose of our 
> work perhaps we should wait until we see public comments from users and 
> registrants indicating that we ought to look into co-ownership arrangements 
> before moving any further with those discussions.
> 
> a.
> 
>