RE:[gnso-vi-feb10] Neustar Concerns with Afilias Proposals

[Jean Christophe VIGNES <jcvignes@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,

I haven't had the chance to exchange with the other members of the so-called 
"open registrar" proposal but I would like to personally echo Neustar's 
concerns.

So far we still haven't been formerly convinced that co/vi was the pure evil 
some are protraying it to be. Rather, it seems to me this proposal represents a 
significant step backwards from any potential innovation and for what? Only 
because this is the only solution some have thought of to rule some mythical 
"bad actors".


Bad actors, if there are any, need to be policed and sanctionned. Simply saying 
forbid vi so bad actors will disapear is tantamount to spending all your life 
behind closed doors so you won't get any germ... It just doesn't work.

The fact that we are on a somewhat short time frame is no excuse either: 
thousands of emails and months of work should not lead to mere status quo or 
"big" actors just willing to stay big.

JC

(Sent from my BlackBerry)
---------------------------------
Jean-Christophe Vignes
EVP & General Counsel

DCL Group

http://JCVignes.tel



-----Original Message-----

From: Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 14:04:34 America/New_York
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Neustar Concerns with Afilias Proposals



All,

I just wanted to go on the record with Neustar’s concerns over a strict 
interpretation of the “Afilias/PIR/Go-Daddy/Some ALAC members” proposal.  As 
you know from the beginning, Neustar has opposed the complete vertical 
integration of registries and registrars because of all of the harms to 
registrants that have been previously expressed in letters we have helped 
co-author as well as the damaging effect on ensuring a level-competitive 
playing field amongst registries, registrars, back-end operators, etc.  
However, our concerns have been confined to the vertical 
integration/cross-ownership within a TLD as opposed to a general notion of 
cross ownership.  What I mean is that we have never supported the notion that a 
registry or back-end registry operator could not distribute domain names in a 
TLD for which it was not the registry or back-end operator.  This is not 
necessarily because Neustar wants to be a registrar, reseller or distributor 
for .com, .net or any new TLDs, but rather that we do not see any justification 
or any potential harms that would occur cross TLDs.  In fact, we believe that 
Afilias’ proposal would have the effect of preventing any existing registrar or 
reseller from becoming a registry or back-end operator in any TLD even if they 
agree not to distribute names in that TLD.

To us, that is by definition anti-competitive and would unnecessarily restrict 
new entrants into the registry/back-end registry service provider market 
without any justification.  Similarly, it would restrict new entrants into the 
registrar market as well simply because they serve as a registry in a separate 
TLD.    Preventing a Demand Media, Network Solutions, GoDaddy, Tucows, GMO or 
any registrar from being in the registry business completely is not what 
Neustar had in mind and is not something we can or should get behind.  
Similarly, preventing an existing or future registry/registry service provider 
from becoming a registrar or reseller in other TLDs is not what we have 
advocated.

To summarize, I do believe strongly in strict limits to vertical integration 
and cross ownership within a TLD and believe that without such limits and 
protections, consumers and registrants will be harmed.  I know there are others 
that dispute that and that is something we will work in the long term.  But we 
have not seen any evidence of potential harms cross TLDs nor have we heard a 
justification for it.  I prefer the JN2 Proposal because it contemplates this 
scenario.  The only way we could support another proposal like the Afilias one, 
is to address the cross TLD issue.

P.S. – we know the ICANN proposal is similar to the Afilias one in this respect 
and therefore will probably be making the same comments to the DAG.

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / 
jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx>  / 
www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>
________________________________
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.


________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------

This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have 
received this e-mail by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and 
delete it from your system. You must not copy the message or disclose its 
contents to anyone.

Think of the environment: don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

--------------------------------------------------------