Telepathy Inc comments

[Nat Cohen <natcohen@xxxxxxxxx>]

ICANN?s Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Commerce
commits
ICANN to promoting competition in the management of the DNS.

---------------------
  
2. Competition
 
This Agreement promotes the management of the DNS in a manner that will
permit market mechanisms to support competition and consumer choice in
the
technical management of the DNS. This competition will lower costs,
promote
innovation, and enhance user choice and satisfaction.
 
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/icann-memorandum.htm

-----------------------
  
The proposed .org, .biz and .info agreements are anti-competitive. 
They
will result in higher costs, stifle innovation, and introduce
tremendous
uncertainty into what had been a stable pricing structure. For these
reasons
alone, the proposed agreements must be rejected.  The renewal
agreements
need to be revised to be consistent with ICANN?s stated objective of
fostering competition, consistent pricing, and lower costs.
  
ICANN has abdicated its responsibility to act in the public interest.
Instead it is acting like a regulator that has been captured by the
interests of industry it is supposed to be overseeing for the public
benefit.  The only interests advanced by these agreements are the
registries.
 
A properly managed DNS would result in vigorous competition to provide
registry services, predictable pricing, and falling rates for domain
prices
that reflect the rapidly falling costs of providing registry services.
 
ICANN, having learned nothing from the criticism of the Verisign.com
renewal
debacle, is once again proposing a regulatory environment that stifles
competition and results in unjustified price increases.  This time,
however,
ICANN has gone even further in the wrong direction by allowing
registries to
appropriate for themselves value in domain names and associated web
sites
created by others, permitting those who control the registry to plunder
the
value and goodwill of domains that were generated by others.
 
Although the expense of providing registry services is falling rapidly,
ICANN is permitting unjustified price increases.
 
Although competitive bidding for the registries would allow market
forces to
express themselves through reduced renewal rates and better delivery of
services, ICANN prevents competitive bidding.
 
Although presumptive renewals insulate registries from competition and
remove incentives for them to operate in an efficient way that is
responsive
to their customers, ICANN prefers presumptive renewals to reopening the
registries to competitive bidding.
 
The Internet has produced an unprecedented explosion of innovation,
competition, and creativity.  It is ironic that ICANN, the organization
charged with fostering the Internet, should operate on principles
fundamentally contrary to the essence of the Internet.
 
Nowhere is this contradiction more blatant that in the presumptive
renewal
provisions of these agreements.  Companies such as MySpace, YouTube,
and
Zillow shoot up from nowhere to become industry leaders in a few short
months.  It is impossible to pick next year?s leaders on the Internet. 
Yet
ICANN wants to cement the current registries in perpetuity through
presumptive renewals.  ICANN believes it can predict five
years in advance that the companies currently running the registries
will still be the best suited to run them in the future.  Without
justification or need it forecloses the possibility of allowing these
registries to be re-opened to bid in a future none of us can foresee.
 
The presumptive renewal provisions are consistent with ICANN?s
assumption
that its judgment is superior to an open competitive marketplace. 
ICANN is
managing the Internet with the same planned economy approach that
history has repeatedly shown results in inefficient allocation of
resources, provides the foundation for graft and corruption, and
stifles the innovation that is the essence of the Internet.
 
ICANN now proposes language that permits an exploitative tiered domain
pricing scheme.  Although from the registry perspective each domain is
just
like another and the costs to process each domain is identical, ICANN
proposes permitting tiered-pricing that would transfer value in already
registered domains to the registry who played no part in creating this
value.  As others have suggested, this is a regulatory taking that
legitimizes the theft of value created by others.  It could turn the
registries into the largest cyber-squatters of all.
 
If ICANN could be seen as simply a misguided oversight body, violating
its
founding charter, ignorant of basic economic principles, and captured
by the
registries it purports to oversee, that would be bad enough.  Yet ICANN
profits alongside the registries by taking an ever growing amount from
domain name fees. Each time a new registry agreement is proposed that
includes terms such as monopoly pricing and presumptive renewals, ICANN
fees
increase as well.  It is a cozy arrangement between the incumbent
registry and ICANN for mutual self-enrichment.
 
In the interests of the Internet community as a whole, I hope ICANN
members engage in some soul-searching as to what their role should be,
and bring to the Internet community agreements that reflect ICANN's
founding principles including ?market mechanisms to support competition
and consumer choice?.

Nat Cohen
President, Telepathy, Inc.
1937 14th St. NW
Washington, DC 20009
tel: 202-234-9800
fax: 202-234-9808
ncohen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com