[gnso-vi-feb10] chat transcript from today's call

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: mike@xxxxxxxxxx
> Date: September 6, 2010 12:48:22 PM CDT
> To: mike@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Adobe Acrobat Connect Pro - Chat Transcript from Vertical Integration
> Reply-To: mike@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
>  Mike O'Connor:Happy Labor Day.  :-)
>  Katrin Ohlmer:hi
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:hi katrin!
>  Katrin Ohlmer:hi eric
>  Mike O'Connor:https://st.icann.org/vert-integration-pdp/index.cgi?harms
>  Volker Greimann:Good Morning, afternoon, evening, night, whereever you may 
> be. Sorry to be late, traffic was hell
>  richard tindal:Tom +1
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:howdy volker
>  richard tindal:Scott -what do u mean by several end users?
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:richard scott is not on-line
>  Volker Greimann:wow, I think we have hit a new low. btw: it is taking longer 
> than usual to get on the call
>  Volker Greimann:nevermind, i am connected now
>  Roberto:I got an exceptionally short time on my side, though. Interesting 
> differences!
>  Volker Greimann:I am sorry to be so silent on the list lately, getting 
> swamped at work
>  Tom Barrett - EnCirca:@scott.  I agree.  for example:  some registrants 
> prefer to use a single vendor to manage their domains.  removing VI actually 
> increases their costs.  then there is the public at large.
>  richard tindal:thx eric    Do u know what he meant by that?
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:not a clue
>  Volker Greimann:regarding vertical seperation harms: do we have the harm to 
> competition that would result from an initial strict seperation and later 
> losening of restrictions yet?
>  Volker Greimann:loosening
>  Tom Barrett - EnCirca:@Volker...I think this is implied in bullet three abut 
> the 10 year start with legacy registries not able to compete.  but it is not 
> stated.
>  Sivasubramanian M:Availability / Pricing Harms :   Rather than argue whether 
> it becomes easier to do Domain Tasting  in a VI environment, why don't we 
> define Tasting as a harm and discuss and propose meithods of preventing 
> tasting?  On the issue of pricing,  higher prices can be imposed even in a 
> vertically separated environment where there are powerful registries or 
> powerful registrars or both. We don't have to have rigid price regulation, 
> but some overall guidelines and conventions to ensure that prices for TLDs 
> donot disproporationately increase over time ( for example the price of a 
> .com becoming $ 100 after 5 years, way ahead of the inflation adjusted 
> equivallent of the current price )
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:i don't think so volker, neither jeffe nor avc showed 
> any interest i could see in transition of rules as a source of interest
>  Volker Greimann:ok, will add it to the wiki during the wee
>  Volker Greimann:week
>  Volker Greimann:mikey +1
>  Sivasubramanian M:Another Question:  If a Registry would share its data with 
> its integrated Registrar, what would prevent it from sharing it with a 
> 'partnetr' Registrar in a non VI evnrionment, for a fee?  If a Registrar 
> wants to obtain Registry data, it does not require Vertical Intetgration for 
> him to find a way
>  Tom Barrett - EnCirca:on registrant harms:  there is a difference whether 
> registrant is a first-time registrant or already has domains in other tld's.
>  Volker Greimann:New harm from VS now on the list
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:what is the new harm?
>  Volker Greimann:Siva: I asked that many times. Never got a satisfactory 
> answer to this question from any of the VS proponents
>  Volker Greimann:Harm from later revisitation of Vertical seperation
>  Volker Greimann:Effectively: If VI is prohibited in round 1 and removed in 
> round 2+, registrars will have harder time in entering the registry market 
> against incumbents, while registries will have no problem in going direct, 
> effectively removing competition by squeezing out the registrar community
>  Volker Greimann:.... and (this restriction is) removed ...
>  Sivasubramanian M:@ Volker,  possibly hecause they don't have a satisfacotry 
> answer
>  Sivasubramanian M:All these are arguments.
>  Sivasubramanian M:It is possible to argue bothways on both VI and VS on most 
> of the points
>  Sivasubramanian M:VI is bad for the competition, VS is bad for the compettion
>  Tom Barrett - EnCirca:I think all of the harms DO exist today.  however, 
> they are hidden since they violate existing contracts and policies.  The 
> question is:  if they become allowed under contract, does their harm increase?
>  Sivasubramanian M:Separate harms for Vertical Separattion and Vertical 
> Integration
>  Sivasubramanian M:from
>  Volker Greimann:@tom: should they be allowed under contract? I always said 
> the contracts should be written to prevent as many harms as possible, but 
> allow as much flexibility as necessary as well
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:i'll resend my notes, a comment on the jeffe note, a 
> comment on the avc note, and a separate harms note
>  Volker Greimann:that was fast, mikey
>  Volker Greimann:a new record
>  Jothan Frakes:Thanks Mikey
>  Volker Greimann:should full VS also apply to existing gTLDs? If so, say 
> goodbye to .pro, .cat, etc
>  Mike O'Connor:thanks all...  this meeting-room will self-destruct in 15 
> seconds.  :-)

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)