RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: A Call to Harms

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

> If I take as an example the current .SE regime, where IIS (the
> registry)
> owns and operates SE-Direct (a registrar in all effects), and sells the
> domains in the TLD at little over wholesale prices to registrants, yet
> we are able to market .SE successfully to our customers by providing
> easier access, better service or just the convenience of purchasing a
> multitude of TLDs in one place. We do not see any harm to consumers or
> even ourselves caused by this VI-model. This would however be different
> if registrar access were limited or barred. Equal access to the TLD
> allows us to serve our customers better.
> 
> I agree that VI/CO models without registrar access may be possible, but
> they will be much harder to monitor against abuse. It makes sense to me
> to maintain the equal access provision as the best and strongest
> corrective. In many cases of DotObscure, the registry will remain the
> only registrar selling the domain even though others are theoretically
> able to do so as well.
> 

I like these ideas. I don't think they are inconsistent with the MMA proposal, 
indeed I think we proposed pretty much the same thing, just added the check 
from competition authorities. I did not know .se operated that way, but the 
existence of that instance is a very important piece of data that people in the 
PIR/CORE/Afilias camp need to contend with.


Milton L. Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4ALL Professor, Technology University of Delft