Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Competition authorities

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

Avri,

I think in your revised proposal any application with greater than 0% cross 
ownership goes to the competition authority(s).      Is that right?

RT


On Apr 21, 2010, at 5:11 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> I would think that if any competition authority has a problem with the degree 
> of cross-ownership then it would not be allowed.
> 
> Personally I would prefer it if there had been one place every application 
> could be sent for checking with competition authorities (e.g. The WTO as a 
> supranational competition authority) , but as far as I can tell there isn't 
> one.  And like with most laws, if you come under several jurisdictions you 
> are bound by the laws of the most restrictive. 
> 
> At one point I had suggested that instead of the competition authority, yet 
> anther review panel of International competition experts could be used for 
> these reviews, but was told by several people that this would not work.  Not 
> sure I understand why, but I do accept that we are starting to create a lot 
> of those external review panels and that in itself is might be worrisome.
> 
> BTW, we are talking like everyone is going to want to be involved in 
> cross-ownership whereas I had originally thought it to be the exception.  Why 
> do people think that there will lots of application that include 
> cross-ownership?  for example in AVC message I felt like this was going to be 
> a road block for every poor little new registry and I did not understand that.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 21 Apr 2010, at 01:18, Richard Tindal wrote:
> 
>> Avri,
>> 
>> What would happen if the two national competition authorities made differing 
>> judgments?
>> 
>> RT
>> 
>> 
>> On Apr 20, 2010, at 3:57 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 20 Apr 2010, at 18:17, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> That said,  I don't know what would stop an applicant from incorporating 
>>>>> in a jurisdiction where competition 
>>>>> authorities are known to be extremely liberal, or non-existent.  
>>>> 
>>>> Which is what anyone who wanted to "game" a system would do.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> One of the thoughts that I had on that was that since ICANN is incorporated 
>>> in the US, the US competition authorities would always end up  being 
>>> consulted as well as any local ones.  
>>> 
>>> a.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
>