RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Competition authorities

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

Please allow me to chime in with a consideration, coming from my
recollection of previous discussions at the time of the NSI separation.
If I remember correctly, one point made back then was not only about the
operational separation in a Ry and Rr entity, but about a "full" separation.
This means that in the books of the Rr the fee to be paid to the Ry has to
be a real, not virtual, transaction. In other words, the revenue that the Rr
will show in the books is, in the example made of a $6 cost and a $6.5
price, just $.5, exactly as every other Rr, and the Rr would not be allowed
to have any sort of subvention or other financial relationship with the Ry.
If this is the case, and if it is enforced, it would seem to me that for the
financial part there would be no difference whether the Ry and Rr have an
ownership relationship, although this would still be a problem if we
consider other relationships, like the access to Ry data by the Rr, which
will put them at advantage.
Regards,
Roberto


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Tindal
> Sent: Tuesday, 27 April 2010 00:08
> To: Eric Brunner-Williams; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Competition authorities
> 
> 
> Yahoo could apply for a registry, as it is not 15%+ 
> cross-owned by a registrar.
> 
> Yahoo could then become a reseller of its own TLD -- but this 
> reseller would operate at a fraction of the per-name cost of 
> the registrars with whom it competes.
> 
> RT
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 26, 2010, at 5:58 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> 
> > Well, how does CORE's proposal allow Yahoo to run the 
> nickle exploit?