[gnso-vi-feb10] RE: "livability"
- To: Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>, "Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: "livability"
- From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:14:10 -0400
If any of the incumbents applied to be a new registry or back-end operator,
wouldn't that in essence require such a divestiture. Sure, if they do not
apply to be a registry or back-end, you may be right, but I don't think that is
really going to be an issue. In either case, at least with respect to Neustar,
we do not own any percentage at the current time of any icann-accredited
registrar or reseller.
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.
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Milton L Mueller
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 9:35 AM
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] "livability"
When we talk about whether one can "live with" the DAGv4 proposal, I have one
major uncertainty. My understanding is that DAGv4 ownership limits and
separations would ONLY apply to new applicants, and NOT to incumbents and their
existing TLDs. Thus, DAGv4 would prevent registrars from having any significant
ownership interest in registries of new gTLDs, but it would not require
Afilias/Neustar/VeriSign et al to divest their existing ownership interests in
registrars. Is that correct?
Milton L. Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4ALL Professor, Technology University of Delft