RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with the Economists Salop/Wright at 20:UTC

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Milton,

Not to take away from your point about the protection of consumers, I would 
note that the ICANN Bylaws (http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm#I) state:

"5. Where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms to promote 
and sustain a competitive environment.

6. Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain names 
where practicable and beneficial in the public interest."

In number 1, below, You have spun that in your answer and equated that with 
protecting profits....not a fair characterization.  But I am torn, because you 
do acknowledge it in your answer to No. 3, 4 and 5 and so I think we are on the 
same page.




Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy


The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Milton L Mueller
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:01 PM
To: tbarrett@xxxxxxxxxxx; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with the Economists 
Salop/Wright at 20:UTC


Good question, Tom

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> The questions I have for the group are:
> 
> 1. are we limited to considering harm only to consumers?

Fundamentally, Yes. By that I mean that it is not ICANN's remit or legitimate 
purpose to protect or preserve the profits of any particular business. Its task 
is the public interest.

> 2. should ICANN be concerned about harm to existing or future
> registrars?

No, if by "harm" you simply mean removing protections or artificial market 
restrictions whose only purpose is to retain the economic viability of 
companies that would not otherwise be competitive. 

> 3. Does ICANN want to continue to encourage new registrars to enter the
> marketplace?  Or is it done?

ICANN should be concerned about the contestability and competitiveness of the 
market, not with the number of registrars 

> 4. Is there any harm to consumers if there are a lot fewer registrars
> than today?

Again, the issue is the degree of effective competition, not the number of 
registrars. 
If we can have intensive, efficiency-producing competition with a dozen 
registrars or 1200 registrars doesn't really matter, as long as the competitive 
process is working efficiently.

> 5. what if there were fewer registrars than gtld's.  Is this a healthy
> marketplace for consumers?

See answers to #3 and #4