ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board resolution on Vertical Integration

  • To: "Hammock, Statton" <shammock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board resolution on Vertical Integration
  • From: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:59:18 +0200

As previously indicated, while I do not like parts of it, it is a proposal I could live with.

Following on the comments of Avri and Stephane, I would suggest that the WG start looking 
seriously at the JN2 proposal for a consensus position.  It's neither a "Free 
Trade" position nor a strict separation position but rather contains important 
concepts that allow new players in the market, provides for the allowance of greater than 
15% interest and control in certain cases, and allow for some flexibility going forward 
(e.g. after the first 18 months, ICANN may amend the controlling interest provision with 
consensus approval). I think of all the proposals discussed, this one comes closest to 
what the GAC has suggested and it's also the one that has the most chance of getting 
rough consensus.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 3:50 AM
To: Avri Doria
Cc: vertical integration wg
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board resolution on Vertical Integration

Well done for pointing this out Avri.

I think the GAC letter provides some useful insight into what a kind of 
consensus solution from this group might look like:

Absent market power, registrars should be allowed to "enter the domain name market". They 
have "valuable technical, commercial and relevant local expertise" to offer.

The GAC also recognize that allowing registrars to be able to provide 
registry-support services to applicants would increase their options in terms 
of finding partners with the required knowhow to aid them in building their TLD 

It is clear that, at this stage, the full VI solution is not something that is 
acceptable to most people. But neither is the full separation solution.

I'm hoping the group can take that on-board as it searches for some kind of 
consensus over the next few days.


Le 27 sept. 2010 à 03:34, Avri Doria a écrit :

On 26 Sep 2010, at 21:10, Mike O'Connor wrote:

-- the proposals -- we're about evenly divided in thirds between JN2, Free 
Trade and RACK+, is there a way to consolidate them into something that can be 
described as rough consensus?
We might also want to think about this in light of what the GAC said in their 
letter to the Board as quoted by Eric:

Begin quote:

Registry-registrar separation

The GAC notes the significant work being done within the ICANN community to 
resolve the difficult issue of registry-registrar separation. The GAC looks 
forward to further discussion of this important issue.

The GAC notes that CANN has incorporated strict rules in version 4 of the DAG 
under which registrars are not able to provide registry services or to operate 
a new gTLD. Governments generally support restrictions on vertical integration 
and cross-ownership as important devices for promoting competition, preventing 
market dominance and averting market distortions. The GAC notes in this regard 
the Salop
and Wright report and recognizes that vertical separation may be warranted 
where a market participant wields, or may in the future wield, market power.

However, the GAC also recognises that if market power is not an issue, the 
ability of registrars with valuable technical, commercial and relevant local 
expertise and experience to enter the domain names market could likely lead to 
benefits in terms of enhancing competition and promoting innovation.

An important additional benefit which the GAC expects would flow from such an 
exemption would be that community-based TLD applicants would be able to cast 
their net more widely in securing partners with the necessary expertise and 
experience in the local market to undertake what would be relatively small 
scale registry functions.

The GAC therefore urges ICANN to resolve the current debate about 
registry-registrar separation with a solution that fosters competition and 
innovation in the DNS market by allowing exemptions, subject to some form of 
regulatory probity that ensures a
level playing field, for certain registrars as potentially valuable newcomers 
to the registry market. ICANN may find it useful to consider the experience of 
competition regulators around the world in addressing this issue.

End quote.

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:

Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
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:

CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
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.

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy