Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Group on documenting "harms"

[Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 Hi,

to create arbitrary limitations on cross ownership based on the mere 
fear of such abuse is just as ridiculous. Sufficient equal access 
provisions will most likely not allow such a market capture to happen. 
And even so, there may be cases where there is no harm to registrants 
resulting from such a market share.
As Amadeu showed, there are registrars in .cat with a huge share of the 
market, even without vertical integration.  Many new gTLDs will be 
registered mostly through the top ten big name registries, who will 
divide up the market for the new TLD with the largest registrars 
profiting most without VI. The scenario you are describing therefore can 
happen with or without VI. But is that necessarily bad for the 
registrant? And could it not be addressed in different ways?
I agree however that we should at some point seek outside professional 
counsel. To do that properly, we first need to define what we want to 
see researched. Therefore, the list and definition of harms is needed.
Best,


Volker



> To create a laundry list of 'possible harms', and not attach any sort of 
> probability and severity assessment to those harms, would be ridiculous.  For 
> example, it's possible that a vertically integrated registry could capture 80% 
> of the domain name market in its first year.
>
> If members of this WG are unqualified, then who is more qualified?  Perhaps we 
> can consult them...
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> RODENBAUGH LAW
> tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
> http://rodenbaugh.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 7:56 AM
> To: 'avri@xxxxxxx'; 'Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Group on documenting "harms"
>
>
> Again to restate....I don't even believe any of the existing registries or 
> registrars are qualified to assess the likelihood of these harms.
>
> And opinions of unqualified persons are not relevant.  Let's figure out the 
> harms and how to address them and not worry about our opinions as to how likely 
> they will be to occur.
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
> Vice President, Law&  Policy
> NeuStar, Inc.
> Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wed Jul 28 10:42:09 2010
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Group on documenting "harms"
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I disagree. Obviously.
>
> I think everyone in this group is qualified to have an opinion.  Many of us 
> have watched Rys and Rrs for years.  And we have a pretty good view of how they 
> will behave. Using your analogy, I don't need to be trained in the field 
> stripping of M16 (which I am) in order to be to tell how much danger it might 
> hold in different peoples hands.  Now if the concern is the likehood that a 
> particular piece of equipment might fail then yes you may have a better idea, 
> just like knowing how to field strip and clean a rifle might give you a better 
> idea of when it might jam.  but I don't think the risk of equipment failure is 
> what we are worrying about.
>
> And if there any possible harms to consumers, which i what I thought we really 
> cared about, I doubt that Rrs and Rys have a better view of the than the non 
> contracted types among the group members.
>
> a.
>
>
> On 28 Jul 2010, at 15:31, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
>
> > Avri,
> >
> > I would not be in favor of this group assessing how likely the harms would be 
> > as I do not believe opinions coming from those that never operated a registry 
> > and a registrar together have any true basis by which to make a judgment.  I 
> > think our job would be to figure out what harms there are out there and how to 
> > address them.  But I fail to see how qualified we are as a group to assess how 
> > likely it will be for a registry that operates a registrar to engage in bad 
> > behavior.
> >
> > An extreme analogy.  You take a loaded pistol and put it in front of 100 
> > people.  Can our group assess the percentage of those people that will actually 
> > use it on someone?  The answer is probably, no, we have no ability to do that.  
> > However, we can address the what if scenario by saying, we can mitigate the 
> > potential harm by (1) making sure there is bullet proof glass in front of the 
> > 100 people, (2) making sure that the pistol is loaded with blanks....etc.
> >
> > Maybe not the greatest analogy, but the point is that I do not believe this 
> > group is qualified to opine via a poll as to the likelihood of certain harms, 
> > but it can figure out ways to address them.
> > Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
> > Vice President, Law&  Policy
> > NeuStar, Inc.
> > Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wed Jul 28 01:48:29 2010
> > Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Group on documenting "harms"
> >
> >
> >
> > On 28 Jul 2010, at 03:06, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
> >
> > > Let's prioritize for harms that are dangerous AND most likely to occur.
> > I think after the Harms Sub Team lists all of the possible harms, setting these 
> > two values may be a good use for another of Mikey's polls were we each rate the 
> > degree of harm (H)  and the likelihood of  the harm occurring (L) on a 5 point 
> > scale.
> >
> > then to arrive at the ranking factor =  H * L
> >
> > and then averaging and showing range for each defined harm.
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > a.

--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -

Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com

Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.key-systems.net/facebook
www.twitter.com/key_systems

Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 1861 - Zweibruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534

Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede 
Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist 
unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per 
E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.

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

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Best regards,

Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -

Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com

Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.key-systems.net/facebook
www.twitter.com/key_systems

CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 1861 - Zweibruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534

This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is 
addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this 
email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an 
addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the 
author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.