Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] SRSU

[Antony Van Couvering <avc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have not touched the SRSU issue because it it is a non-issue in a 
100%-integration model.  Others have said that it's already possible under the 
current DAG, but let me propose another way of going about it.

1. Assume that my exceptions process is adopted.
2. Brand becomes a registrar (cost: approx. $10K)
3. Brand sets up registration criteria to the effect that only the brand can 
register names (then watch as no registrar applies to distribute the TLD, 
except the brand-owned one)
4. Brand delegates a single name to itself.
5. Um, that's it....



On Jul 7, 2010, at 11:45 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:

> 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)?
> KR:  SEE IPC STATEMENT. 
> Let me start.
> 
> There should not be "sales" of SLDs, the names under the TLD are distributed 
> internally based on declared criteria. 
> KR:  AGREE THAT SHOULD BE NO SALES.  "INTERNALLY" NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY DEFINED.
> 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.    
> KR:  IF "PASSING" REFERS TO TRANSFER TO UNRELATED PARTY IN SRSU SCHEME, 
> AGREE.  HOWEVER, I ALSO SUPPORT A SRMU MODEL IN WHICH THE USER, WHICH IS 
> RELATED TO THE REGISTRY  EITHER THROUGH A PRIMARY AGREEMENT FOR OTHER GOODS 
> AND SERVICES (e.g., SUPPLIERS, AUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTORS, ETC.) OR AS ITS 
> TRADEMARK LICENSEE.  UNDER THE CONDITIONS THE IPC PROPOSED, THE REGISTRY 
> WOULD MAINTAIN CONTROL OF THE NAME.
>  
> 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.
> 
> KR: AGREE
> 
> There might be interesting questions, like:
> 
> Will they be allowed to use the services of one registrar, selected by them, 
> or not? 
> 
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 2:40 PM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] SRSU
> 
> The theme is the following: 
> 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)?
> 
> Let me start.
> 
> 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? 
> Cheers, 
> Roberto
>