Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: Innovative Proposal - Jeff E response

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On 15 Apr 2010, at 14:25, Michael Palage wrote:

> 
> I think Milton, Jeff E and I are looking for actual harms, so that we can 
> address them. Prior to Seoul I supported Afilias/Neustar/PIR's position 
> because DemandMedia opposed any audit. Given that they have made an important 
> concession on this point, let's talk about how to give the audit teeth 
> instead of those that oppose an idea without providing any specific examples 
> of harm that cannot be addressed through an audit/complaince program.


As I watch this conversation, I find myself coming to the conclusion that the 
need for external audits with teeth comes in as soon as there is any 
cross-ownership at all.  For if the registries and registrars are not to 
trusted with higher degrees of ownership and if they are often so nefarious as 
to find a way to take advantage of any situation, then the 15% cap, an 
admittedly arbitrary number, is no protection at all.

That is, I think we need a system of audits with teeth no matter what the cap 
if that cap is greater then zero.

a.