ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[soac-newgtldapsup-wg]


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

Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Draft replacement proposal for bundling

  • To: Andrew Mack <amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Draft replacement proposal for bundling
  • From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 15:06:13 -0400


Andrew,

You wrote "... this discount open to anyone, as our goal is to get the scripts out there -- a potential benefit to all script users ..."

This would then allow Versign access to discounts for the scripts of its strategic choices, advancing its particular interest.

Just to take as an example, the Hebrew Script ".com equivalent" that some ISPs provide in Israel, and assume that the Hebrew Script market is sufficiently small that a second registry offering Hebrew Script would be problematic,

1. Are the interests of the Hebrew Script users best advanced by Verisign's successful execution of its goal of getting ".com" in the Hebrew Script?

2. Are the interests of the Hebrew Script users best advanced by the current ".com in Hebrew" operator's successful execution of its goal of getting ".com" in the Hebrew Script?

3. Do the interests of the Hebrew Script users lie elsewhere than in the choice of Verisign or someone else operating a ".com" in the Hebrew Script?

Obviously, Verisign can "find the money" at any discount faster than a Community that meets our test for need. Similarly, Verisign's competitor, someone I, and I suspect others know, in the Hebrew Script market, can "find the money" at any discount faster than a Community that meets our test for need.

If the cost is the same for Verisign, and for a investor-or-speculator, as it is for a Community, then it seems likely that where the Community meets a needs criteria, its ability to support two or more registries is problematic, and therefore granting any applicant a lowered cost barrier to entry in that script market is really the granting of a script monopoly to some entity external to the Community.

Really, if our only goal was to "get the scripts out there", the best course of action would be to offer terms to Verisign. I think our goals are more complicated than just "get the scripts out there", as it makes a difference who is offering a script, to whom, and under what policies.

Eric



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy