ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Tierney letter to Strickland, via Dengate-Thrush

  • To: Mueller Milton <mueller@xxxxxxx>, Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx, Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Tierney letter to Strickland, via Dengate-Thrush
  • From: Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:59:10 +0800

I read it the same way.    In the context of new TLDs the DoJ recommendation is 

What they seem to be saying is that a pre-delegation decision must also be made 
whether or not a new TLD could have
market power (the last para in particular applies).      Milton -  Do you read 
it the same way?

If so, I don't know how anyone would pre-determine the likelihood of this (esp. 
if the applicant is a new entity).

Welcome thoughts from others.


PS.   the band is NOT getting back together

On Jun 18, 2011, at 2:45 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> That's actually not a correct summary. The DoJ Antitrust Division opinion was 
> that cross ownership should not be allowed without first a finding that the 
> registry in question does not have, and is unlikely to get, market power. If 
> no market power is found, then CO for CNOBI would be fine. 
> Some of you may recall that this is precisely what the MMA proposal called 
> for. 
> Eric, as I recall, was not so pleased with the MMA proposal.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-
>> feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 1:24 PM
>> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Tierney letter to Strickland, via Dengate-
>> Thrush
>> Colleagues,
>> I'll keep this short. The DoJ has responded to the DoC's letter on
>> competition policy issues arising from ICANN's removal of all cross
>> ownership restrictions on contracted parties.
>> The DoJ guidance is first, that removing cross ownership restrictions on
>> the CNOBI set of registries should be recinded, as this is likely to
>> result in higher prices, with .name and .pro ignored, though both are
>> price-capped, and second, that .aero, .coop, .museum, ... the sTLDs,
>> should presumptively be allowed to exercise cross ownership, absent
>> market power.
>> I'm very pleased with this outcome.
>> Eric

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy