<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
.Pro Proposal Feedback
- To: <rproproposal@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: .Pro Proposal Feedback
- From: andrew campbell <akcampbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:51:47 +0000
I support the proposal to widen the eligibility criteria for .Pro domain
registration. The current geographical and profession based restrictions are
unfair and unworkable. My concern is that these proposals fail to aknowledge
the scale of .Pro's failure and the role uncommercial pricing and profiteering
has played in that.
The November 2007 Registry Operator's Report shows just 6,297 .Pro
registrations. 4,354 of these are registered by Encirca using its proxy service
and a further 902 are held by Registry.Pro so there are actually only 1,041
.Pros registered in accordance with the original restrictions. To put that into
context, on the first day of landrush, .Asia received 266,663 applications.
Since March 2005, 80% of .Pros have been held via Encirca's proxy service so
for the vast majority of .Pro registrants, restrictions have not been an issue.
Hence, easing them is not a cure-all for .Pro's ills.
Registry.Pro are contractually obliged to charge registrars $6 for third level
and $6.50 for second level .Pro's. In reality, they charge $125 and $50
respectively. This additional mark-up is supposed to cover the cost of bundled
digital certificates but these are not provided to the majority of .Pro
registrants. Encirca follows Registry.Pro's lead, marking up the $50 wholesale
cost to $99 but in the absence of A/V checks the justification for a further
100% mark up is questionable.
The $99 .Pro reg fee is ten to twentyfold higher than other gTLD's. This puts
most people off registering and discriminates against professionals in
developing countries. ICANN has an obligation to ensure .Pro is affordable for
qualifying professionals, irrespective of where they work. Until all parties
involved stop milking .Pro registrants for excessive fees, it will continue to
languish even if these proposals are approved.
I would urge ICANN to make one addition to Registry.Pro's proposals;
1) Remove the requirement for second level .Pro's to be issued with digital
certificates. This would slash the wholesale cost of .Pros by 87% and encourage
take up among bigger registrars. Failing that, unbundle the provision of
digital certificates so registrants can choose who they buy them from.
Andrew Campbell
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|