RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] My thoughts on the proposals

[Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jon and Avri - you are right, that it would not be allowed under the DAG and 
that is exactly my point. 

When I had discussed the idea of compromise and allowing a Registry to own a 
Registrar but not distribute that TLD there was an example given on ways around 
it by using resellers. That example of ways around it was a way around it, but 
that was also a prohibition in the DAG. My point was that there is an even 
simpler way for a way around it even though it is prohibited in the DAG, by a 
Registry setting up a reseller and distributing directly.  


Now that I have probably confused everyone including myself, let me try to give 
one more example and try to include Alan's discussion about the RAA as well.

YYY is a Registry that is owned by ABC Corp.
RRR is a Registrar that is owned by ABC Corp. 
YYY and RRR are separate companies but happen to have the same owner ABC Corp.

YYY has a Registry agreement with ICANN and all domains sold under YYY TLD and 
the actions of the YYY Registry are subject to this Registry agreement. In the 
Registry agreement it states YYY Registry and its Affiliates (or any person or 
entity acting on their behalf) shall not act as a Registrar, Reseller or any 
other form of distributor with respect to the TLD. This means YYY cannot become 
a reseller of another Registrar either. YYY is not subject to the RAA since it 
is only a Registry. The Registrars that sell YYY are subject to the RAA. 

RRR is a separate company and a Registrar and thus subject to the RAA. 

This brings me back to my original point, there will be a prohibition in the 
DAG for a Registry to distribute the TLD so the example that Alan gave is 
prohibited in the DAG just like the example that I gave.  Some people state 
this would be too complicated and too hard to police, and my response is that 
if a Registry decides to go against the DAG and be a bad actor, owning a 
Registrar does not facilitate this or make it harder to police. 



Jeff Eckhaus






-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 7:26 AM
To: VI
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] My thoughts on the proposals


Hi Jon,

Yes, I think so.

Was not reading it correctly.

thanks
and thanks to those who pointed it out to me privately as well.

a.



On 4 Jun 2010, at 14:13, Jon Nevett wrote:

> Avri:  Wouldn't it be prohibited based on the language in the highlighted 
> part of 2.9(a)?  Best, Jon
> 
> 2.9   Use of Registrars* (see note below).
> (a)   Registry Operator must use only ICANN accredited registrars in 
> registering domain names. Registry Operator and its Affiliates (or any person 
> or entity acting on their behalf) shall not act as a registrar, reseller or 
> any other form of distributor with respect to the TLD or any other top- level 
> domain. Registry Operator must provide non-discriminatory access to registry 
> services to all ICANN accredited registrars that enter into and are in 
> compliance with Registry Operator's registry- registrar agreement for the 
> TLD. Registry Operator must use a uniform non-discriminatory agreement with 
> all registrars authorized to register names in the TLD, provided that such 
> agreement may set forth non-discriminatory criteria for qualification to 
> register names in the TLD that are reasonably related to the proper 
> functioning of the TLD. Such agreement may be revised by Registry Operator 
> from time to time, provided however, that any such revisions must be approved 
> in advance by ICANN. !
 
 This Section 2.9 shall not preclude Registry Operator from registering names 
within the TLD to itself through a request made to an ICANN-accredited 
registrar. [Registry Operator shall not engage or otherwise permit any 
registrar, reseller or any other form of distributor, or any of their 
Affiliates (or any person or entity acting on their behalf) to provide Registry 
Services for the TLD.]
> 
> On Jun 4, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 4 Jun 2010, at 06:04, Jon Nevett wrote:
>> 
>>> Jeff:  Wouldn't AAA Registry be prohibited from setting up reseller SSS 
>>> under the rules in DAG4?  If so, I'm not sure that your example works.
>> 
>> I am not sure which rule prohibits that.
>> 
>> a.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>