Re: [ga] Vint on proposed .biz, .info and .org agreements

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

George and all,

  Good argument here George.  Remember though, Vint is
not blessed with common wisdom, and like John Postel,
abhors and finds such wisdom, folly.

George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
>
> --- Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > source:
> > http://forum.icann.org/lists/pdp-pcceg-feb06/msg00370.html
> >
> > To: Council GNSO
> > Subject: [council] Response from ICANN Board chair
> > with regard to the proposed .biz, .info and .org
> > agreements
> >
> > From: Chair, ICANN Board
> > To:  GNSO Council
>
> <snip>
>
> > Neither outcome should be a surprise.  I wished to
> > write, however, to tell you that the Board (including
> > me) consider input from the Council carefully.  A
> > conclusion that differs from council member advice
> > does not indicate the Board "ignored" the advice.  The
> > Board receives inputs from many sources and these
> > inputs are frequently conflicting in their character.
> > The Board is obligated to reach conclusions despite
> > variations in the recommendations it receives.  If the
> > Board conclusions differ from recommendations of the
> > GNSO, it will be a consequence of considering all
> > advice received including that of the GNSO Council.
>
> Nice attempt to try to explain away ignoring the "bottom up" consensus
> driven process.
>
> Any decision to approve these flawed proposed contracts should leave no
> doubt to anyone that the Board has been captured and no longer
> represents the public interest. That was obvious to many given the
> approval of the bad .com settlement with VeriSign, but approval of
> these .biz/info/org contracts should leave no doubt to anyone else.
>
> The registry contracts themselves leave open the possibility for a
> tender process, at ICANN's sole discretion. See sectin 5.2 of the
> existing .biz agreement, as an example:
>
> http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/unsponsored/registry-agmt-11may01.htm
>
> "..... but the decision whether to accept the Renewal Proposal shall be
> in ICANN's sole discretion."
>
> "5.2.2. Only after the six-month period described in Subsection 5.2.1
> may ICANN call for competing proposals from potential successor
> registry operators for the Registry TLD."
>
> "....but the choice from among competing proposals shall be in ICANN's
> sole discretion."
>
> A 10 year old could tell you that in order to get the best possible
> deal, you don't just negotiate with one party. To get the best possible
> deal, you need to shop around. Smokey Robinson and the Miracles could
> have even told you this:
>
> http://www.singulartists.com/artist_s/smokey_robinson_lyrics/shop_around_lyrics.html
>
> "And then she said -
> 'Just because you've become a young man now
> There's still some things that you don't understand now
> Before you ask some girl for her hand now
> 'Keep your freedom for as long as you can now'
>
> My mama told me, 'You better shop around'
>
> ....
>
> 'Try to get yourself a bargain son'
> 'Don't be sold on the very first one'
> A pretty girls come a dime a dozen
> A try to find one who's gonna give ya true lovin'
>
> It's basic common sense. How can you know whether you've gotten the
> best possible deal, unless you know what the alternatives are? This is
> a basic element of a negotiation, that you have to know what your
> alternatives are, so that you can say "No deal."
>
> I concur with the comments of Nat Cohen, who wrote:
>
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/revised-biz-info-org-agreements/msg00065.html
>
> " Unless the gTLD registry renewals are opened to competition among
> providers, ICANN is operating in a vacuum as to what are the accurate
> market rates for providing registry services."
>
> and
>
> "ICANN has no basis for stating that the price increases are justified
> because ICANN is preventing the operation of market forces that most
> outside observers expect would result in a DECREASE in the cost of
> domain fees."
>
> ICANN's Board is making a conscious CHOICE to not get market pricing
> information by not holding a tender. They make a choice to put their
> heads in the sand, should they accept these revised contracts. The
> question should be, "Why?" This only serves to benefit the incumbent
> registry operators, who are seeking to renew their contracts in
> perpetuity at above market rates. This is counter to the public
> interest.
>
> For less than the cost of hiring an external "economic expert" (who may
> or may not be unbiased), one could at *less expense* hold a public
> tender for operation of these registries. Simply create a specification
> (based on the existing contracts), and leave open price as the variable
> by which prospective registry operators can submit bids. Pick the
> lowest bid that meets the specs!  This is done thousands of times a day
> for government and private sector contracts -- why is ICANN different,
> and is deviating so markedly from established best business and
> operational practices??
>
> To close, I hope that ICANN's Board will be listening to Smokey
> Robinson during their Board meeting:
>
> 'Before you take a girl and say, 'I do' now' (uh-huh)
> 'Make sure she's in love with-a you now' (uh-huh)
> 'Make sure that her love is true now' (uh-huh)
> 'I'd hate to see you feelin' sad and blue now'
>
> My mama told me, 'You better shop around'
> (Shop, shop around)
>
> Uh-huh don't let the first one get you'
> (Shop, shop around)
> Oh no, cuz I don't wanna see her 'wich-you''
> (Uh-huh, 'before you let 'em hold you tight'
> A yeah-yeah 'make sure she's alright'
>
> Uh-huh, 'before you let 'em take your hand my son'
> 'Understand my son'
> 'Be a man my son'
> 'I know you can my son'
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827