Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Re: Q&A - RyC and JAS WG VERSION 2 - PLEASE REVIEW by Friday May 20

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Cintra, Colleagues,

I appreciate that the text has been sent to the GNSO Council already.

In asking "Assuming the fees are reasonable with regard to services 
provided to registries, would other registries be expected to make up 
the deficit?  Or does the WG believe the fees are too high?  If the 
latter, was any analysis done to support that position?", Jeff Neuman 
asks us to accept an assumption.
The unstated assumption is that all registries are the same, that all 
are "like" the com/net/org/biz/info business model.
Jeff doesn't ask us if ICANN has a higher cost, if it doesn't provide 
more "services" to problems caused by profit maximizing operators, to 
unrolling .biz's illegal sunrise lottery, to stopping .com's wildcard 
"registry service", aka "Site Finder", to studying, and finally 
stopping domain tasting, aka "AGP abuse", and reviewing the .jobs 
breach of its sponsorship, than it provides to .museum, .coop and .cat.
I don't think we should accept the premise that everything is like 
.com (or .biz when Jeff represents the VGRS/Afilias/NeuStar members of 
the RySG).
I think the more factual position is that ICANN has assumed, as a 
matter of convenience, a one-size-fits-all model, during a period in 
which it has twice experimented with creating both competition among 
similar business models (.com, .net competing with .info and .biz, and 
the divested .org) and innovative business models (.aero, .coop, 
.museum, .cat, .mobi, .tel, .post), and that there is now sufficient 
experience to distinguish the costs to policy the original market, 
with its profit seeking registry operators and registrars and 
resellers and domainers, and the cost to policy the sponsored and 
community serving registries, which are not a "market", but the 
separate, though similar, social constructs of cooperatives and 
communities and similar social entities.
In the longer-term, the monopoly of the RySG will itself be challenged 
by the dis-simularity of interests of .com-clone profit maximizing 
registry operators, and registries operated in a public interest.
For our present, noting what Jeff wants us to assume, to the benefit 
of his employer, and his advocacy interests, and those his employer 
shares with its market-controlling "competitors", and the advocacy 
interests of the those market-controlling "competitors", and declining 
to overlook the
Eric