Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Orphans, existance and exploitation of

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmm. Accepting the build-or-buy-a-registrar-is-expensive premise for
the moment, and the awkward problem all the exception proposals have
for when the exception limit is reached and transition to a the
Recommendation 19 regime must take place, in addition to Jon's
proposal, which Jeff correctly remembers at 100k, the advantages of a
100% owned registrar shared with no other registries are also present
in the 15% owned registrar shared with six or more other registries.

The gaming opportunity is removed. Equal or better benefits accrue to
the registry cost-and-complexity sharing with other registries, such
as a common rights-of-others capability, common legal staff, ...

Eric

On 5/3/10 12:36 PM, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:
> 
> Kathy,
> 
> While I know you are looking for a compromise on the Orphan TLD idea does not 
> work in a real marketplace, but I do believe there is an excellent idea in 
> your proposal. Lets forget about the gaming issue for a second and think 
> about what the Orphan idea does to a TLD.
> 
> The TLD has to go around with its hands out begging for a spot on the shelf, 
> then if everyone rejects them they have to make a special application to 
> ICANN stating they are so unwanted that they need to announce it to ICANN, 
> have a 30 day comment period for everyone to know and comment how bad and 
> unwanted their TLD is and then the next step. Build or Buy a Registrar. 
> 
> This TLD that has no interest has to invest even more money to buy a 
> registrar or build one. For someone that runs a registrar I can tell you this 
> is no easy task. Then once they finally get their registrar up and running 
> they can only sell X number of domains, then they are held back.
> Now faced with this future, I believe we will force out a great deal of 
> applicants, especially ones in developing countries or with somewhat limited 
> budgets. I do not believe that is your goal, but think that will be an 
> unintended consequence. 
> 
> I do believe there is an excellent idea in your proposal and that is to allow 
> the Registry to own a Registrar and allow them to sell and manage up to a 
> certain number of domains. This is the original Jon Nevett proposal and I 
> believe allowed a Registry to own a Registrar and sell up to 100,000 domains 
> so the TLD could get off the ground. Once the TLD was established, say 100K 
> domains, the Registry could no longer sell new domains, just manage their 
> existing. This would cut off the potential harms as the owned Registrar and 
> give a new TLD a chance to enter the market and compete right from the 
> beginning, not after months of going around begging and having to become an 
> orphan.
> 
> Maybe Jon Nevett could help explain his original proposal on the call today, 
> or maybe I am putting him on the spot, but I think it is an idea that is 
> worth considering (reconsidering) as it removes all the gaming concerns, that 
> orphan stigma and allows competition from the beginning.
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jeff Eckhaus 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 9:14 AM
> To: Eric Brunner-Williams
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Orphans, existance and exploitation of
> 
> 
> Hi Eric,
> Tx for your question. You are, of course, talking about the gaming of
> the exception, and not its intended purpose. But it's a fair question
> nonetheless.
> 
> The purpose of the orphan exception is to reflect problems we have heard
> -- that with so many new gTLDs, a small one may not be picked up by
> registrars, and thus may not be distributed to its intended audience
> (e.g., a small community, a developing country set of groups, etc.).
> 
> It is not intended to provide a way for a gTLD Registry of a new .BLOG
> or .WEB, for example, to keep their domain names to themselves and away
> from the Equal Access provisions for registrars.
> 
> So Eric, would the following restrictions protect against the problems
> you raise?
> 
> 1.  You can only get Orphan status if 3 or fewer registrars offer your
> TLD --  at any point in time; 
> 
> 2.  You have to apply in writing to ICANN for Orphan status and there is
> a 30 day comment period before you can start operations with your own
> registrar or directly (e.g., 30 days for ICANN-Accredited Registrars to
> say "Yes, I want to offer this gTLD!"; and 
> 
> 3.  If, after you start your own registrar operations,  additional
> registrars start offering your names (such that then more than 3
> unaffiliated registrars are offering your TLD) -- then your own
> affiliated registrar is limited to managing X thousand names (e.g.,
> 30,000 or 50,000) -- at which time you must stop distributing your TLD
> domain names entirely. 
> 
> Best,
> Kathy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric
> Brunner-Williams
> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 7:51 AM
> To: Kathy Kleiman
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Orphans, existance and exploitation of
> 
> 
> Kathy,
> 
> Am I correct in understanding the "orphan" status?
> 
> Suppose Registrar X has a standing offer to every new gTLD registry
> applicant. For those applicants which garner no other offer, X is
> guaranteed 50,000 transactions at a margin it sets.
> 
> X could set the price at 10x the registry price, prompting the
> registry to pay greenmail to get "orphan" status, and sell its
> inventory at the registry price, or fail.
> 
> If the first 50k names are going to be generics and trademarks and so
> on, at sunrise and land rush pricing, will any applicant obtain
> "orphan" status before that inventory is exhausted?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Eric
> 
> ------------------
> 
> Kathy Kleiman
> Director of Policy
> .ORG The Public Interest Registry
> Direct: +1 703 889-5756  Mobile: +1 703 371-6846
> 
> Visit us online!
> Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz!
> Find us on Facebook | dotorg
> See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr
> See our video library on YouTube
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
> Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If
> received in error, please inform sender and then delete.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>