Last Post re: New.Net Filling up the ICANN Comment Forum
- To: stld-rfp-general@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Last Post re: New.Net Filling up the ICANN Comment Forum
- From: Kevin Prescott <kevinprescott45@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 16:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
You really do not understand the ramifications of what you are arguing Mr.
Iska. You keep saying that "You couldn't even raise a "dime" from any VC if
you tell them that
you're gonna go head to head with New.net by releasing the same TLDs that
New.net released three years ago."
I will give you the name of one company that go head to head ith New.net (and
probably destroy them)....."VeriSign." VeriSign has enough capital (without VC
funding) to start 1000 new TLDs tomorrow. Would you still be making the same
arguments if this happened? If ICANN allows New.net to prevent a legitimate
bid for .travel, .xxx or any other TLD that New.net operates as a 4th level
domain, VeriSign would introduce every TLD possible as "alternate roots".
Forget new competition or VC funding....they don't need it!
They could even introduce a competing TLDs like .travel, .inc, .web, .shop,
.sex, .kids, .llp, etc.. What would prevent that from happening? If VeriSign
started an Alternate .travel tomorrow (by tweaking their existing IDN plug-in
to have the same functionality as New.net's plug-in), they would have milllions
of potential customers overnight. Then you would have compeiting roots,
competing web addresses, competing e-mail addresses, and a system that would
collapse on itself overnight.
You also point to an "unprecedented risk" that New.net took. You are exactly
on point. New.net took a risk knowing full well that ICANN could select
another registry operator to run a legitimate .travel in the future. They were
banking (and are continuing to bank) on the hopes this does not happen. Well,
like all risks, sometimes you succeed and sometimes you fail. New.net knew on
Day one that this could happen, and now the day may have come. Again, some may
say that knowing a serious risk and failing to notify your customers of the
risk is grounds for civil liability with the FTC....
I will not comment any more about this except to point to the following news
article in CNN in 2001:
"[New.net] acknowledges that it could run into conflict if ICANN decides to
release one of its extensions (such as .llp) as a new top-level domain. "That's
the bet we're taking," says Chadima. He argues that while ICANN is well
positioned to make technical decisions about the Net, "the subject of which
domain names get to be used is a political and economic question that ICANN is
ill-equipped to deal with."
Given how slowly ICANN moves to issue new top-level domains, New.net is betting
that it will have an advantage with any given extension. "If that happens, by
the time that happens," Chadima says, "we'll have tens of millions of viewers
and tens of thousands of site. They will be the collider at that point."
This is the company you all want to reward? A company whose strategy was to
play off the slowness in which ICANN acts. How can a company that knows the
risk at the beginning complain, when that risk comes true?
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs