RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] SRSU

["Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>]

Content controlled by the registry?  That will be a function of the
IPC's suggested conditions.

Content created by the registry?  Disagree.   

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann -
Key-Systems GmbH
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 8:31 AM
To: Roberto Gaetano
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] SRSU


Hi Robert,

I agree with your points, but would add another couple of points I think
of as important:

- a name cannot be made available for use by another beneficiary (no
dotFacebook as SRSU), i.e. the content is fully controlled by the
registry.
- a narrowly defined legal entity as registry, i.e. no clubs, membership
organizations (this should be phrased to exclude all pseudo-SRSU
applicants.

We need to make sure that equal and exclusive access of registras shall
not be circumventable by SRSU registries that are too widely defined.
>
> Under which circumstances would people feel safe in allowing vertical 
> integration for a TLD that has a single registry and a single user 
> (the typical case being a "brand" TLD, for internal use only)?
>
>     * There should not be "sales" of SLDs, the names under the TLD are
>       distributed internally based on declared criteria.
>     * There is no "secondary market", i.e. a name cannot be "passed"
>       to another beneficiary. Actually, the name remains always under
>       full control of the registry.
>
> The point is that if a registry does fulfill these requirements, they 
> will be granted an exception, and will be allowed to operate without 
> giving equal access to all registrars.
>
> There might be interesting questions, like:
>
>     * Will they be allowed to use the services of one registrar,
>       selected by them, or not?
>
I will go with a "Yes" in this regard, but would tend to replace
"allowed" by "required".

Volker Greimann